
Class ..Ejiiie-^ 



l'Ui:SKNTi:i) l!Y 






iw--*' '''SM^^i^Wi^.!M^i''M:^''''^^^^ 'I'r^' '^/:^¥r^\ '"^^SM 



mm C^SAR BURROWS 



1 



;ie Oeiv uviuif "lolii 



D 



SHALLOW DEMAGOGUE UNMASKED. 



" I once thought I was in favor of electing United States Senators by 
direct vote of the people, but I could not vote for it now, because the 
people cannot be trusted." — Julius Ccesar Burroxvs^ in address before 
$tudents at the Baptist College at Kalamazoo^ September^ i8g4. 



"You can fool some of the people a// the time. You can fool all 
the people so??ie of the time. But you can't fool all the people all the 
time." — President Lincoln. 



I come to bury CcDsar, not to praise him. 



SUPPLEMEiNTARY STATEMEN%, 

June 5th, 1900. V '"^'f 

It seems proper to state that owing to serious illness in my fa,mily, as 
well as my own severe illness, necessitating my absence from Washington 
most of the time since January 25th last, that I should state that it was 
my purpose to submit a petition or memorial to the Senate making cer- 
tain statements and charges impeaching the integrity, personal and ofl&- 
cial, of Julius Caesar Burrows, the junior Senator from the State of 
Michigan, and tendering to the Senate proof in support of the specific 
charge that the election of Mr. Barrows to the Senate, to fill the vacancy 
occurring by the death of Francis B. Stockbridge, as well as for the full 
term of six years commencing with March 4, 1899, was pi'ocured by 
bribery and corruption of the grossest character. This pamphlet was 
prepared for presentation to the Republican caucus, which met at Lan- 
sing early in January, 1899. By reason of personal illness, and the theft 
of the manuscript from mj office, it was impossible to secure its j^riutii 
and presentation to said caucus until the day before it met. 

The candidacy of the gentleman who opposed Mr. Burrows — Mr. Al- 
bert Pack — differed only from that of Mr. Burrows in that Mr. Pack 
spent his own money to secure his election, about which he was really not 
specially solicitous, preferring rather to control — as he stated to me and 
others — two committees in each house of the legislature of Michigan than 
to be U. S. Senator ; and that in the closing hours of the contest for Sen- 
ator, he made an alliance with Mr. Burrows, offensive'and defensive, as to 
the future, which made it impossible for the friends of honest elections 
and government to secure an investigation of the methods by which Mr. 
Burrows was chosen Senator at that time. Mr. Pack is dead, but in the 
interest of truth and justice, of good government and political purity, I 
submit now, under great disadvantage, a memorial making this pamphlet 
exhibit "A" thereof with the promise that during the recess between the 
present session and the second session of the Fifty-sixth Congress, I will 
furnish the names of persons who will give testimony and furnish evidence 
of the truth of all the charges herein made, as well as others which will 
hereafter be presented, to whatever committee the Senate may charge 
with the investigation of these allegations and statements. 

HENRY H. SMITH. 



A PERSONAL STATEMENT. 



It is due myself, as well as a proper explanation to the members 
of the legislature, that I should say that but for the fact that either 
duriug the last week in November or the first week of the present 
mouth a carefully prepared package contaiuiug nearly three hundred 
tj'pe and hand Avritten pages of manuscript, the result of nearly 
three years' work of mine, giving a compact history of the Con- 
gressional as well as persoual career of Senator Julius Cciesar 
Burrows since 1870, was stolen from a roller-top desk in my office, 
room 41, Kellogg Buildiug, this cii-fX^^^ -^^i.t.*.,<^->,^cC.^2^^cz/-trcc£,<yC^ 

Immediately after the election of Mr. Burrows to the Senate in 
January, 1895, I commenced this work, which fact is well known to 
at least a dozen prominent geutlemen in Michigan — as well as half 
a dozen gentlemen here — with whom I have conversed on the sub- 
ject, and to whom I have shown portions, if not all, of this manu- 
script. When it was finally completed, last spring, there were nearly 
eight hundred type and hand written pages, and it contained the 
record of every vote Senator Burrows had cast — or "dodged" — in 
both houses of Congress during his Congressional career. It also 
contained some printed extracts from Michigan and other papers. 

It was my original purpose to print last spring a pamphlet giving 
this record for the benefit of all the people of Michigan, in order 
that they might carefully inquire into the charges made and ascer- 
tain for themselves the truth or falsity of the statements it con- 
tained ; but that plan was necessarily changed, for the reason that 
those opposed to the re-election of Mr. Burrows to the Senate agreed 
■ that there should be no announcement of any candidacy against him 
until later in the spring, or perhaps during the summer. I had been 
in ill health during most of the summer and fall, and the special 
work in which I am engaged for the House of Hepresentatives so 
engrossed my time that my health gave way, and on the 22d of No- 
vember I was taken very ill, the illness developing into inflammatory 



rheumatism, confiniDg me to my bed and house for nearly three 
weeks. After recovering from that, I was attacked by the grip, 
from which I am still sufteriug, and when I sought, on the 15th in- 
stant, for my package of manuscript at my office, it was gone, and I 
then discovered for the first time that my desk had been broken 
open, I had much of the original matter, and nearly all of the 
original letters. I have copies — many photo-lithographed — of the 
originals, and if time had permitted, should have published them in 
this form. This pamphlet has been rewritten under great ditiiculties, 
most of the time dictating from m}' bed or in my room, and I have 
been out but four or five days, for short periods only, during the last 
five weeks. 

I make this statement in order that it shall not be charged by 
Senator Burrows and his private secretary that it has been pur- 
posely withheld until the last moment and sprung ui)on the public 
on the very eve of the Republican legislative caucus to choose a 
successor to Mr. l>urrows. The arrangement of this matter may be 
criticised as not artistic, but the fact remains that this pamphlet 
contains the truth and facts which should be known to and investi- 
gated by the Michigan legislature before it votes upon the all- 
important question of electing anybody to the United States Senate 
for a term of six vears. " It is better to be sure than sorry," and I 
submit this paper with this statement, which can be verified iu every 
])articular if necessary. 

HENRY 11. SMITH. 

Washington, 1). C, Decemher 31, 1898. 



To the 3f embers of the Michigan Legislature of 1899-1900 : 

On the 4th of March, 1899, the term of office of Julias Coesar 
Burrows as Senator from the State of Michigan to fill the vacancy 
occasioned by the death of Francis B. Stockbridge will expire. 
Under the Constitution one-third of the members of the United 
States Senate go out of office every two years, thus insnriug a 
quorum and making the Senate — unlike the House of Representa- 
tives — a permanent body. The constitution of the State of Michi- 
gan requires that the new legislature shall meet at the seat of gov- 
ernment on the first Wednesday in January biennially, and other 
clauses provide for the election of a United States Senator to till a 
prospective vacancy. 

The importance of the office of United States Senator, has grown 
steadily siuce the war. In a very able and instructive article, writ- 
ten by Senator George F. Hoar, of Massachusetts, on the creation 
and organization of the Senate, — tirst published in the T^oath's 
Coinpaniun, subsequently being printed by the Senate as Document 
No. 26, 2d Se:3s. 54th Cong. — Senator Hoar stated that " the framers 
of the Constitution placed their chief hope in the Senate." In that 
article he said : 

" In the first place they made it a perpetual body. The Presi- 
dent lays down his office at the end of four years. If any obstacle 
prevent the election or induction of his successor, the executive 
power itself is in abej^ance. The House of Representatives has 
but a short life. A new one must be organized every two j-ears, and 
a large part of its term is often consumed in the process of organi- 
zation. 

" But the Senate is indestructible. The Senate, which was organ- 
ized in 1789 at the inauguration of the Government, abides and will 
continue to abide, one and the same body, until the republic itself 
shall be overthrown or until time shall be no more." 

Continuing in this vein, Senator Hoar shows the great importance 
of the Senate, clothed as it is with the treatj^-making power con- 
jointly with the President; of confirming all the important offices of 
the United States, including the army and navy and all other branches. 
For that reason it has become a matter of more importance to each 
State as the Government and States grow in population, strength, 
and power, that proper selections shall be made of United States 
Senators by the State legislatures. 

Michigan has honored itself in the past by sending some strong 
men to the Senate. It has also sent some weak men. For another 
purpose I have compiled the history of Michigan's Senators and 
Representatives in Congress, and am entirely familiar with the his- 
tory of each, save, perhaps, that of some of the earlier members, 
about whom only meagre information can be found. I have been 
connected with the House of Representatives for twenty years in 
important positions, and with the Senate two years. Prior to that 



I held an important office in the Treasury Department, from the 
spring of 1865 until ni}' connection -with the House in 1870. Since 
my connection with the House terminated in 1892, I have been 
present during all the sessions of Congress ; been acquainted with 
the leading members of both Houses, and familiar with the work of 
each body, and I say upon my honor as a man and citizen, that Mich- 
igan never sent a more tricky demagogue and hypocrite or a more 
dishonest man to either house of Congress than Julius Cfesar Bur- 
rows. 

I know that I rest under the imputation, sedulously cultivated by 
Julius Ca'sar Burrows autl his nian "Friday" Rose and other hire- 
lings, of having a personal grudge ; of being a disappointed office- 
seeker ; with being an ingrate and the like, and I propose to briefly 
show the falsity of these latter charges and the truth of my first 
assertion as to trickery, hypocrisy, demagoguery, and dishonesty of 
Julius CiX'sar Burrows. This man for the last seven years has tried — 
and with the assistance of his lobbyist friend "Nat" McKay during 
the last three — to break me down personally, political!}', and finan- 
cially, and now my time, for which I have patiently waited, has come. 

I first made the acquaintance of Mr. Burrows in the campaign of 
1868, when Gen. Stoughton was a candidate for election to Con- 
gress. I heard Mr. Burrows speak a few moments. It required but 
a few moments to show that he was a shallow sophomoric declaimer, 
and I did not meet him again until the campaign of 1870. In that 
year I was elected Secretary of the State Central Committee, 
Stephen D. Bingham, of Lansing, being Chairman, our headquarters 
being at that place. The committee organized, and about the last 
of August I received a ])rivate letter from Mr. Burrows asking mj' 
assistance in securing appointments for meetings for him in some 
of the leading cities of the State, especially at Lansing, Jackson, 
Ann Arbor, and Grand Rapids. He stated that he would be glad 
to speak as often as the committee desired and would charge the 
committee but ten dollars per day, with an allowance for his 
expenses. By the following mail I received a letter from the Hon. 
Dwight May, of Kalamazoo, protesting against the emplo3'ment of 
Mr. Burrows as a cam])aign s])eaker by the Kepul)lican State (/entral 
Comujittee. General May enclosed a ])aragra})h clipped from the 
Kalamazoo Tclegraj^li saying that Mr. ]>urrows would probably be 
in the em])loy of the committee through the camjiaign. General 
May wrote that lie made this protest, not only on his own behalf, 
but also on behalf of prominent Republicans of Kalamazoo, among 
whom he named H. G. Wells, Allen Rotter, Colonel Curteiiius, J)r. 
Stone, editor of the Kalamazoo TL'lc(/ni/)h, and a half dozen others. 
General May stated that Mr. Burrows, with a lot of unscrnpulous 
office-seekers, had conspired to defeat the renomination of General 
Stoughton, then serving his first term as Representative in Congress 
from that district, and had resorted to the most unscrupulous 
methods to accomplish their vile jjurpose. They had ])rocured 
atKdavits from an ex-state's prison-bird defaming General Stough- 
ton, charging him with having sold offices and the like, and saying 



that they had stopped at nothing to accomplish his ruin and defeat, 
and the nomination of JuHus Coesar Burrows in his place. General 
May stated that Mr. Burrows had been an active part}- in all their 
infamous proceedings, and had pledged himself that if elected he 
would give the important offices in the district to the gang of men 
who were hounding General Stoughton because he would not 
surrender to their demands. General May concluded his letter by 
saying : 

" This man Burrows has brought disgrace upon the Republican 
party. Such a man as he should never be employed by the 
Republican State Central Committee of Michigan, and, as an 
original Republican, and on behalf of the gentlemen I named, I do 
most earnestly protest against his employment b}- the committee." 

The matter of emploj'meut of speakers had been left to the chair- 
man and executive committee. At the time of the receipt of that 
letter Mr. Bingham was seriously ill, and the matter was held up 
for several days. Finally it was decided to employ Mr. Burrows, 
and that gentleman knows to-day, as well as he did at the time, that 
I was instrumental in turning the executive committee in his behalf 
and securing his employment. He made several speeches, and I 
gratified him exceedingly by assigning him to Ann Arbor. I still 
have Mr. Burrows' letter thanking me for my kindness to him, and, 
although in the following campaign I opposed his election, and in 
1874 took editorial charge of the Kalamazoo Gazette, with the late 
Dr. Foster Pratt, and had much to do with his defeat, which termi- 
nated our acquaintance temporaril}', he did not hesitate to ask my 
support for his nomination and election to the Forty-sixth Congress. 

There is another chapter in the career of Julius C?esar Burrows 
which should be told, but which, yielding to the advice of friends, 
I will not publish. It is known pretty generally in Kalamazoo and 
throughout the State, as well as to some extent here, but through 
no instrumentality of mine. 

Such a man — as Senator Stockbridge not only repeatedly stated to 
me verbally, but wrote — " has no more moral character or sensibilities 
than a lizard, and a club is the proper argument for him." That 
is one of the letters which Mr. Burrows has vainly sought by coaxing 
and treachery to procure, and, if necessary, I will produce it to a 
committee of inquir3^ 

Mr. Burrows has stated that I owed my position as Journal Clerk 
in the House of Representatives and as Assistant Register of the 
Treasur}^ to him. A brief statement will show the absolute falsity 
of this claim. When Mr. Burrows came into the Forty-third Con- 
gress he found me clerk of the Committee on Claims of the last 
House, of which the late Governor Blair was chairman. Mr. Bur- 
rows, as stated, was defeated for election to the Forty-fourth Con- 
gress by Allen Potter, and dropped back into private life. He was a 
candidate for the Republican nomination to the Forty-fifth Congress, 
but was defeated by Judge Keightle}', of St. Joseph count}^ and again 
withdrew into private life. He industriously plotted and planned 
to defeat Judge Keightley for renomination, denying him the right of 



a second term as he had Gen. Stoughton, and succeeded in securing 
Judge Keightle3's defeat and his own nomination. He was nouiinated, 
after sharp opposition, to the Forty-seventh Congress and elected, 
and after another and still more bitter contest was nominated for 
the Forty-eighth Congress and defeated by George L. Yaple. Mr. 
Burrows thought this was the end of his political career in Michi- 
gan. He cried like a school-boy over his defeat and " refused to be 
comforted." The reasons which led to his defeat will be stated 
elsewhere, as this is an outline sketch only of his career. During 
the Forty-seventh Congress came the incident of tlie " Brule and 
Ontonagon grant bill," in which he was guilty of the vilest treachery 
to the late Senator Stockbridge. So thoroughl}- ashamed was he of 
his performance that he sought throughout the entire second session 
to make arrangements to establish business connections elsewhere. 
He visited two or three cities, Rochester being the first, in the hope 
of forming a legal association with Hon. John Tan Yoorhees, the 
Bepresentative from that district. Mr. Van Yoorhees, however, 
like the able and cautious lawj^er that he is, looked up Mr. Bur- 
rows' standing as a lawyer in Michigan, and decided that he did not 
desire to form a law partnership with him, and the thing fell 
through. Just then there was a" hegira" of Kalamazoo County people 
to Dakota. Judge Briggs, formerly Mr. Burrows' law partner, had 
decided to go there, and Mr, Burrows sought the appointment of 
Solicitor of the Treasury, Avith the vicAv of thereb}' securing prestige, 
with the ultimate purj)ose of securing employment from the Northern 
Pacific Bailroad at Bismarck, or some other point along its Hue. 
Only a portion of the members of the Michigan delegation indorsed 
Mr. Burrows' application for Solicitor, Judge Hubbell and an 
other member refusing to indorse him, and the appointment was 
made with the distinct agreement that it was to be tendered as a 
matter of form to Mr. Burrows by President Arthur and was to be 
declined. Tlie performance was gone through with, and Mr. 
Burrows as formally declined the office as he had that of In- 
spector of Internal Revenue in 1868, aud, although he never per- 
formed the duties of that office for an hour, he put in a claim for 
payment of sahuT and expenses of a trip to Wasliington. All of 
this is stated elsewhere. At the instance of Mr Burrows, I visited 
Philadelphia and saw Mr. Charles B. Wright, then the President of 
tlie Northern Pacific Railroad, with whom I was well acquainted. 
I urged Mr. Burrows' apj)ointment as one of the local attorneys of 
the road, saying that it was Mr. Burrows' intention tt) locate at ]>is- 
marck, "grow up with the country," and finally come in witii 
Dakota as one of its Senators. Wlieu I made this visit IVlr. Bur- 
rows had not been guilt}' of the vile treachery to Col. Stockbridge 
to which I referred. "JMiat will also be stated elsewhere. Mr. 
Wright asked me the names of some of the leading attorneys or 
lawyers of tlie State to whom he could write as to Mr. Jiurrows' 
stiinding at the bar. I gave him some thirty names, and was told 
subsecjuently that out of twenty-seven replies but three were 
favorable, and one was from Mr. Burrows' law partner. Mr. 



Wright showed me a letter from the late A. B. Maj^nard, of Detroit, 
then, I believe, United States District Attorney for the Eastern 
District of Michigan, in which, after acknowledging receipt of Mr, 
Wright's letter of inquiry, he said : 

" I know but little of Mr. Burrows, who is a local professional 
politician, who incidentally practices law when out of Congress. 
He has been defeated twice for the House of Representatives, and 
also twice for the Republican nomination. I have made inquiry 
and failed to ascertain that he has ever been connected with an im- 
portant case, and am frank to say that, as to his ability and quali- 
fications as an attorney, Mr. Burrows is not the first man to bring 
reproach upon an honorable profession by claiming to be a lawyer." 

Mr. Wright wrote me — and I still have his letter — saying that he 
was satisfied Mr. Burrows was not the man the road wanted as its 
attorney, and that while he wished Mr. Burrows success politically 
as a friend of mine, he was very much afraid, from what Mr. Ran- 
dall had told him, that he would not " come in as one of the Sen- 
ators from Dakota." 

Of Mr. Burrows' experiences in Dakota, it is not necessary to 
speak. He failed to make a living, and, although, in a formal 
interview in the Kalamazoo Teleyraph in May, 1883, he had an- 
nounced his purpose to " pull up stakes " and leave the State, he 
returned to Kalamazoo for the purpose of resuming amicable rela- 
tions with Col. Stockbridge, if possible, and making another attempt 
for the Republican nomination to the Forty-ninth Congress. The 
Forty-seventh Congress expired on March 4, 1883. Mr. Burrows 
did not visit Kalamazoo until the latter part of April. He carefully 
avoided Col. Stockbridge, as stated, and spent the summer and most 
of the fall in Dakota, returning late in the fall to Kalamazoo to try 
his luck once more in the old Kalamazoo district. He succeeded 
in resuming the amicable relations he desired with the late Senator 
Stockbridge — after telling him that he (Stockbridge) had a right to 
kick him (Burrows) from one end of Main street in Kalamazoo to the 
other for his conduct on the Brule and Ontonagon bill — for that 
gentleman was anxious to secure the passage of what was known as 
the bill so named. Col. Stockbridge, then a private citizen, had written 
numerous letters denouncing Julius Cissar Burrows for his action 
in defeating that bill in the second session of the Forty-seventh 
Congress, in the vain hope of securing the nomination for Senator, 
through the " bunch " of Upper Peninsula votes promised him by 
Judge Hubbell, which were also promised, as stated, to Mr. Willetts, 
of the Monroe district. I have several letters from Col. Stockbridge 
on this subject, which it was my purpose to have photo-lithographed 
and printed ; but the robbery referred to, together with my illness, 
has prevented, although I still have the original letters. After that 
it was plain sailing with Mr. Burrows, through the favor and friend- 
ship of Col. Stockbridge. Mr. Stockbridge had large interests 
which required occasional legislation, and Mr. Burrows having made 
his peace, after making the most abject and humiliating apology to 
Col. Stockbridge for his treachery, had learned one lesson at least, 



and that was to be true to the man who paid nearly all the expenses 
of his Congressional campaigns, loaned him money or indorsed his 
notes, took him into his family regularly every Sunday when Con- 
gress was in session for many years, and incidentally at other times ; 
and yet, during all this time, Julius Cresar Burrows was secretly 
maligning, assailing, and attacking the character of his benefactor, 
Francis B. Stockl)ridge. All this is well known to Schuyler S. Olds 
and others. I have before me a letter from one of the most noted 
magazine writers and a former newspaper writer of great brilliancy. 
No man's name is wider known in this country than his. Some 
3-ears ago this gentleman told me that coming over from New York 
on the train one day Mr. Burrows told him that he (Burrows) would 
have been in the Senate long before but for the fact that rich men 
had taken a fancy to get into the Senate from Michigan ; that 
Thomas W. Palmer's election was secured through the use of money 
and the influence of great corporate wealth, and that Francis B. 
Stockbridge had his seat in the Senate bought for him twice. 

I also have before me the following letter from Mr. Stockbridge : 

" United States Senate, 
" Washington, D. C, September 1st, 1893. 
"Dear Harry: At your earliest convenience please call and see 
me at my house, as I wish to consult with you as to a matter in 
which we have a mutual interest. 
" Hastily yours, 

"FRANCIS B. STOCKBRIDGE." 

I called on the Senator that evening and had a long and confi- 
dential conversation with him. He told me that his relations with 
Mr. Burrows, although frank and friendly, were, as a matter of fact, 
almost unbearable ; that he had learned from reliable sources that 
Burrows was slandering and villifying him secretly ; that in spite of 
the fact that he (Stockbridge) had loaned Burrows considerable 
sums of money and had indorsed his notes for a great deal more. 
Burrows had circulated rumors affecting his (Stockbridge's) financial 
standing; that Burrows was quietly circulating rumors that he 
(Stockbridge) was liable to drop dead any moment from Bright's 
disease of the kidneys, and that he was then secretly at work 
throughout the State securing support as his successor. 

Sf^nator Stockbridge narrated many incidents showing the 
duplicity and hyjiocrisy of Burrows, which were not all new to me, 
and I frankly told the Senator some facts which surprised him very 
greatly. He repeated his great regret that he had allowed himself 
to be wheedled into forgiving Burrows for his treachery to him in 
the ]>rule and Ontonagon bill and helping him bac^k into Congress, 
and, for that mattei", keeping him there. He then said to u\v., sub- 
stantially, this, which 1 wrote out immediately after leaving his 
house : 

" Harry, I feel that it is niy duty to tell you that Mr. Burrows is 
not only not your friend, but that he is secretly doing all he can to 



9 

break you dowu persoually aud politicall3\ He says that you have 
some letters of his which will trouble him some time aud that you 
have three or four letters from me which will trouble him more, and 
he has asked me to get them from you aud destroy them. I have re- 
fused to do that, for the reason that you had a right to protect your- 
self, and I know Burrows to be such a sneak and liar that he would 
do either of us any dirty trick in his power to advance his own in- 
terests. I know to what he refers, and I hope you will keep the 
letters safely, and you have my permission to publish them at any 
time you deem necessary, althongh one — and perhaps two — is 
marked ' confidential.' I have tried to stop Burrows from this 
dirty work he has been doing toward you, and have told him that 
he would come to grief about it ; but he insists that it is cold 
politics, and that if he does not destroy you, you will destroy him. 
If it were not for the fact that Mrs. Stockbridge likes Washington, 
and that I have some special interests to look after here this winter, 
I would resign and divide my time between Kalamazoo, Chicago, 
and Mackinac. I am thoroughly sick and tired of the hypocrisy of 
politics, aud I would resign from the Senate to-morrow if I could 
properly do so. I know also from members of the House delega- 
tion that Burrows has thrown out hints and suggestions unfriendly 
to you, and that he has done the same thing wherever he could 
decently do so. It is not two days since I called him down for an 
unfriendly fling at yo», saying that he owed what he was as a par- 
liamentarian entirel}' to }ou, reminding him that he had repeatedl}^ 
said so years before, and that he had many a time said to me, when 
we Avere making our campaigns together, that he appreciated the 
fact that you had done so much for him and never stood in his way 
for Congress, as 3'ou could have defeated him for renomination 
most undoubtedly, even if you did not desire the nomination your- 
self." 

I well remember that Senator Stockbridge was deeply affected 
by this conversation, which brought tears to his eyes, as it did 
to mine. I had known the Senator since the winter of 1861, when 
I met him while reading law with Wilson C. Edsell, at Otsego, Alle- 
gan county. Mr. Stockbridge had always been my friend, and I 
had been his. He was a tender-hearted, generous, and forgiving 
man, and for the last quality Julius Csesar Burrows is to-day in- 
debted for his position in the Senate, as but for the forbearance of 
Mr. Stockbridge, Mr. Burrows would have remained in private life 
when he was defeated for the Forty-eighth Congress, on account of 
his wobbling course on the river and harbor bill of the first session 
of that Congress, aud his broken promises about offices in his dis- 
trict. The interview was a very sad one, for Mr. Stockbridge was 
not well, and I have never forgotten it and never shall. As stated, I 
wrote it out promptly, within one hour after reaching my home, and 
I have the notes precisely as I then wrote them. The sudden death 
of Senator Stockbridge the following spring was a great surprise to 
the public, but not to his intimate friends, who knew of his impaired 
health. 



10 

Withiu six hours after the receipt of the dispatch from Chicapjo 
announciug his death, Mr. Julius Csesar Burrows had flooded the 
State of Miehigau witli telegrams to promiueut liepublicans, asking 
them to wire or write Governor Rich in behalf of his apj)ointment 
as Senator Stockbridge's successor. Mr. Burrows kept his steuog- 
raplier and ty])ewriter bus}' all that day and late that night dictat- 
ing letters and telegrams to people throughout Michigan, asking them 
to write or wire Governor Eicli to appoint him Senator. To my 
personal knowledge, he procured an extra book of Western Union 
franks from the agent here for that purpose, and yet when I called 
at his office on F street, about 10 o'clock in the morning of May 1, 
1(S94, and asked him the question if he would be a candidate for 
appointment, he rejdied, " Not a bit of it. I am content where I 
am. I don't think that Governor Rich would appoint me anyway, for 
he doesn't like me, and he never has liked me since we served together 
in the Forty-seventh Congress. Rich didn't like it because I didn't get 
him on the Committee on Ways and Means, wdiere he thought he ought 
to go, and I suppose he will appoint somebody of no account from his 
town who will keep the place warm for him antl allow him to slip into 
the Senate himself next winter." Later in the day I learned from 
Mr. Fry, his clerk, as well as from the stenographer and messenger, 
that Julius Caesar Burrow's was sending out dispatches and letters, 
as I have stated, requesting recipients to wire or write Governor 
Rich in his behalf. When I told Mr. Burrows that the rumor was 

current that he would be a candidate he said, "The rumor be d d. 

I am not doing a thing about the matter." 

About eleven o'clock he came to my office in the Treasury and 
asked me to write a laudatory article about him for the St'tr. I 
wrote the article very unwillingly, and have the original copy in my 
own handwriting, as corrected and changed by him, from which a 
typewritten copy was made by my typewriter, and the publication 
made in the Slar of May 1, 1894. That publication recited Mr. 
Burrows' long service in tlie House, especially on Ways and Means ; 
suggested that he was a " receptive candichite," and generally was 
of a complimentary character. I hated to write the article, because 
I knew that Burrows was not my friend ; and indeed I knew that 
he had been secretly inimical to me for several years, because I 
would not surrender certain letters which he desired. He said to 
me: "It is no use talking about my being chairman of Ways and 
Means, although I am next to Reed on the committee. He doesn't 
like me, and 1 don't like him, and for that reason I would like to go 
to the Senate ; but, as I told you, Rich will never appoint me, 
i)ecause of the reasons given." I then asked him, "If you are not 
appointed now, will you be a candidate next winter? If so, you 
had better start now and look after the candidates for the legislature, 
especially from your own district and county. Tiiere is Colonel 
Sumner of the city district. He is a good man to have returned, 
although you treated him very badly about the post-office in 1874. 
I don't know Miller, the other member, but presume yon do." To 
my astonishment, he replied, " Who is Miller? I don't know any 



11 

such mau in the legishiture from Kalamazoo county." That made 
me very angry, and I replied very sharply, " Wh}^ you infernal liar, 
there's a typewritten letter Ij'ing there on your desk addressed to 
him for your signature. I heard you dict3,ting it as I sat in the front 
room, talking with Mr. Fr}'," and with that I left his office. 

Mr. Burrows had charge of the Congressional committee to attend 
the funeral of Mr. Stockbridge, and, as is customary, had a private 
coach for that purpose. I had said to him that I would like to go 
to Kalamazoo and attend the funeral ; that I had known Mr. Stock- 
bridge for thirty-three years, during which period we had always 
been w^arm personal friends ; that I thought it would seem strange 
to Mrs. Stockbridge and the people at Kalamazoo if I did not come. 
He remarked rather sharply, " There isn't a vacant berth in the car." 
A member of the funeral party from here subsequentl}' told me that 
Burrows said to him on the car, " I shut Harry Smith out of this 
party for he is ' booming ' ex-Governor Blair for appointment to 
succeed Stockbridge, and he would try to Avork up a sentiment for 
Blair's appointment." And this was while Mr. Burrows Avas pre- 
tending to be friendly to me, constantly calling upon me, as he had 
done for years, for advice and assistance, and just after I had drawn 
and put in shape the stock-jobbing whiskey-ring investigation resolu- 
tion, out of which he made several thousand dollars by selling whiskey 
stock before introducing his resolution, which depressed it seven 
points, and then buying on the rebound, making money both ways, 
all of which is narrated in another place. 

Our relations during the remainder of the summer and fall were 
strained. As usual, I went home to vote in November, 1894, and 
saw Mr. Burrows both prior to and after the election. He denied 
being a candidate for the Senate against Mr. Patton, and on another 
occasion admitted it. The last conversation I had with him was in 
Wortley's jewelry store in Kalamazoo, when I advised him that my 
note for three hundred dollars, which he had indorsed and which 
had been discounted by the firm of Corson & Macartney, the then 
leading stock-broker firm in Washington, was nearly due, and that 
Mr. Macartney had said that at the expiration of the renewal (90 
days) he should expect its payment. I then said to Mr. Burrows : 

" You have repeatedly promised to refund money expended by 
me for your political benefit in the way of attending caucuses, con- 
ventions, and incidental expenses in Washington. I have paid out 
of my own pocket considerable money for you in Washington, and 
you have repeatedly said, ' Keep an account of this, and when I get 
a little easier financially, I will meet it. It's all right.' Knowing 
that you had realized several thousand dollars out of the wliiskey- 
ring resolutions and other speculations, I said that you were 
abundantly able to meet this note, Avhich Avould not reimburse me 
by any means for the money I had paid on your account and for 
your interest. You replied that you believed that was so, and said 
again : ' Don't bother yourself about this. I will take care of the 
note when it matures, as I agreed, but I could not meet it now, 
because my campaign expenses have been very heavy.'" I did not 



12 

tlien know that Messrs. Blodcjett and McKay were paying his cam- 
paign expenses, and I took him at his word, thougli I had no 
special reason to have any faith whatever in any statement he made. 
I spoke occasionally to ^fi\ Macartney afterward about it, and he 
said that he had called on Senator Burrows for payment, as per 
agreement, and that Burrows had asked him to let the matter run 
along aAvhile, finally asking him to sue me for personal reasons 
which would be gratifying to him (BurroAvs). 

This narrative may seem tedious and trifling to some, but it is 
written in order to put myself right in the eyes of those who believe 
the untruthful statements which have been made by Julius Ofesar 
Burrows and his satellites. Every effort which was in his power 
has been exerted to break me down in every possible way. My 
business has been inquired into by his direction and in various 
ways has been interfered with. I have reason to believe, and do 
believe, that certain special employment I had was discontinued 
through the machinations and influence of Senator Burrows. Yet, 
during all this time, I have been the recipient of scores of requests 
from mutual friends, made at his instance, to meet Mr. Burrows in 
order to bring about a reconciliation. I have steadily refused all 
these propositions, which have come not only from Michigan 
people, but from personal friends in the House of Representatives 
and several from lobbyist " Nat " McKay and his lawyer, John S. 
Blair, who for years has been my personal friend. These people 
have represented to me that it would be to my interest to " make 
up " and let bygones be bj'gones. To all these suggestions and 
requests I have uniformly responded, " I would not trust Julius 
Ca?sar Burrows under any circumstances, nor believe him under 
oath. He has broken faith with everj'body with whom he has had 
political or personal dealings since I knew him, except where he is 
under great personal or pecuniary obligation to people who have 
helped him, like the Blodgetts, ex-Senator Palmer, the Pennsylvania 
B. E., lobbyist ' Nat ' McKay and others." My very first acquaint- 
ance with him, beyond a sight acquaintance, commenced in 1870, 
while he was doing his best to disgrace that gallant Michigan hero, 
Gen. William L. Stoughtou, and defeat his reuomination for a 
second term, to which, under the well-established custom in 
the Republican party in Michigan, he was entitled. Elsewhere 
are submitted paragraphs taken from the files of the Kalamazoo 
Telegraph of the spring and summer of 1870, prior to the lioldiug 
of the (/ongressional convention, where General Stoughtou was 
trium])hautly vindicated hy a r«Miomination. From that time to date 
I cannot recall a campaign in which l^urrows has not bitterly and 
vindictively attacked not only his Democratic opponents, but those 
in the Republican party who were not friendly to his ambition. He 
assailed the honesty and integrity of Allen Potter, of Kalamazoo; 
he did the same with George L. Yaple, of St. Joe county, and so on 
througli tli(! wiiolc! long line of candidates against him, or Repub- 
licans who opposed his political ambition. I iiave already referred 
to liis shameful treachery to Colonel Stockbridge, and I could name 



13 

scores of other instances if they were needed. But they are not. 
Throughout the State of Michigan, outside of the federal office- 
holding "push" and the personal Burrows contingent, the name of 
Julius C?esar Burrows stands as a synonym for duplicity, hj'pocris}^ 
demagoguery, treachery, and falsehood. This is not a mere figure of 
speech born of personal prejudice and passion, but the cold, frozen, 
sober truth. I have heard hundreds of leading Republicans 
throughout the State say as much ; and yet they have not the 
courage to stand up openly and be counted as they have privately 
expressed themselves. Of course, most of these people are poli- 
ticians, with possible political futures, but the great body of Repub- 
licans with whom Julius Cnesar Burrows has come in contact 
throughout the State, especially those who have sought office at his 
hands, know this statement to be absolutely true. And this brings 
me to the tinale of this branch of my narrative. 



THE CHALLENGE. 



[From Grand Rapids Herald {R.), Augud 1, 1807.] 

RECORD OF BURROWS. 



Secretary Rose Talks of the Senator'sWork. 



CONSISTENT ON THE TARIFF. 



Best Possible Bill That Could Pass the Senate. 



Republican Measure in Every Line — No Defence of Mr. Bur- 
rows Necessary in the Stand He Took — Mr. Rose Denies 
That He is Here to Boom Him for Re-election. 



Seated at a roll-top desk upon the upper floor of the Widdicomb 
Building, coat and cuffs upon a chair near by, a palm-leaf fan in 
his left hand, and a pen in his right, sat Henry M. Rose, secretary 



14 

to Senator Burrows, as the Herald representative accosted him 
yesterday. 

" Then these are the Burrows headquarters ? " was the first sahi- 
tatiou. 

"Oh, all that talk about my returninui; to Grand Ilapids to open 
headquarters and to boom Stmator Burrows for re-election is merely 
newspaper gossip," said Mr. Hose. " I have sim})ly returned to 
take up the routine correspondence just where I left it in Washing- 
ton. I did the same last summer and the summer before. The 
morning mails j'ou see upon the desk is but a fair sample of what 
this routine corres])ondence consists of." 

When questioned about Mr. Burrows' career in the Senate, the 
loyal secretary said, with seeming modesty : " I think the Senator's 
record is well understood, and I do not possibly see how he could 
have secured a better recognition or accomplished more for his con- 
stituency. He took his seat in the Senate in January, 1895, when 
the Democratic party was in control of the body, and during the 
remainder of the session employed his time in familiarizing himself 
with the new surroundings, and learning the full import of the term 
' senatorial courtesy,' which seems to require that a member shall 
not essay to speak upon any question during his initiatory session, 
and that when once permitted the floor he shall hold it as long as he 
chooses, 

" When the Republicans secured control of the committee organi- 
zations of the Senate in January, 1S9(), Mr. Burrows was made 
chairman of tiie Committee on Revision of the Laws, which he now 
holds and which gives him one of the handsomest rooms in the 
Capitol, was made a member of the important committees on Privi- 
leges and Elections, Coast Defenses, and Banks and Banking. The 
people of the country do not seem to generally understand the 
Republicans do not have absolute control of the Senate. They have 
been permitted to select the majority members of the committees — 
that is all. They are not in the majority. Hence it is the tarift" bill 
meets some criticism from certain quarters. I am satisfied it is a 
Republican measure in every line and that it is the best })ossible bill 
that could be passed through the Senate as now constituted. 

Received High Recognition. 

"As is well ku(nvn, when Senator Sherman resigned his seat in 
the body there Avas something of a strife among tiie Republican 
Senators to secure the coveted position he had vacated u])on the 
Committee on Finance. The finace committee handles all tariff 
legislation as well as all measures pertaining to the currenc3\ 
Senators Hanna, Thurston, and Piatt, of New York, were anxious to 
succeed Mr. Slu^rman ujion this committee. Senator Sewall, of 
New Jersey, who was a mrmber of the 'steering committee ' that 
reports tlu; makeuj) of all connnittees to the Rc])ul)lican caucus, also 
desired the place. Mr. Burrows was given it l)y almost a unanimous 
vote, which speaks far more than any feeble words of mine can the 
estimates his colleagues in the Senate have for him. He had 



15 

served iipou the Ways aud Means Committee in the Hovise of Rep- 
resentatives, and the question of iitness alone determined his selec- 
tion. A second great honor came to him when he was chosen a 
member of the committee on conference upon the tariff bill. In 
fact, I can conceive of nothing Senator Burrows could have received 
during the extraordinary session of Congress that would have added 
anything to his credit or honor. The very highest recognition was 
accorded him. 

" You ask about his labors upon the conference committee. 
Senator Burrows has always been known as a protectionist. His 
record upon tariff legislation has been consistent during all his long 
term of service. 1 am aware he is criticised some for advocating a 
two-dollar duty upon lumber and voting for a small duty upon hides. 
In taking this course he was consistent. The Republicans who 
criticise him are inconsistent. Eight and ten years ago the very 
men who clamor for a $1 duty were advocating upon the stump and 
elsewhere a 12 duty. They have, however, transferred their business 
interests to Canada since then. It had been proved that a $1 duty 
was not sufficient to keep out the lumber of British America and 
Canada, just as it had been shown that a tariff of four or seven cents 
on wools of the first and second class would not keep out the wools 
of Asia and Australia. 

His Position on Tariff Bill. 

" Senator Burrows not only recognized the lumber industry as 
one worthy of adequate protection, but he labored incessantly to 
protect the interests of the American farmer. He fought for a just 
wool schedule and the protection given the cedar, dressed lumber, 
gj'psum, iron, and other interests in his State. He worked just as 
strenuously for the interests of the Michigan cigar-makers, and I 
happen to know that it was through his personal efforts that a 15 
cents concession was given upon imported wrappers, while it was 
his desire to secure a much more fav()ral)le rate for manufacturers. 
It is not necessary, however, for any one to make a defense of 
Senator Burrows' position upon the tariff bill. As I said, it is a 
Republican measure ; it is a revenue-raising measure, and a pro- 
tective measure. It may not be as perfect as it might have been 
had the Republican party been in control of both branches of 
Congress. In signing it the President has but carried out the 
wishes of the people who elected him ; in voting for it the Repub- 
lican members but carried out the pledges made b}^ the party in its 
national phitform. It seems to me no real good Republican will 
criticise either for the action. 

" Senator Burrows has been at Atlantic City since the adjourn- 
ment of Congress. He will leave there for a trip up the great lakes 
this week, and will remain at Mackinac Island during the greater part 
of the summer. I am sure he deserves and needs this rest, for I 
never knew a man in public life to devote more time or energy to 
his work than he. His hours were from 7 in the morning until 
midnight during his service upon the finance committee, and at the 
close of the session he clearly showed the effects of the great strain." 



THE REPLY. 



HARRY SM 




B 




One Kalamazoo Man Discusses and Dis= 
sects Another. 



riie Ex-Journal Clerk Thinks He Sees a Public 
Duty 15efi>re Him, 



And He Proceeds to Perform It With a (ireat Deal 

of \'igor. 



To the /ulHor : I enclose you lieiewitli a co{)y of a letter to Mr. 
Conger, Editor of the Grand Ilapids Herald^ in re])]y to an inter- 
view with Mr. Henry M. Hose, which I find in Mr. Conger's paper. 
The letter contains facts which have not heretofore been printed, 
and I offer it to you in the hope that you will lay it before the voters 
of the State of Michigan, to whom 1 feel it my duty to explain these 
matters. I am not sanguine that Mr. (/onger will print it, because 
1 uniler!-:tand he is a candidate for postmaster at Ciand Ivapids, 
while the principal owner of the Ilendil has aspirations for a Ger- 
man consulate or something equally as good. Being thus somewhat 
beholden to Mr. Burrows, at least in anticipation, I infer that they 
may not care to print the truth about him. 

HENRY U. SMITH. 

Front Royal, Va., Any. 19, 1897. 

Mr. Smith's Li'.ttek. 

To t/ui h^Titor of t/te Herald: lam just in receipt of a coj)}- of 
vour issue of the 1st instant, containing a carefully prepared "inter- 
view " with Henry M. Rose, who is described as " secretary to Sen- 
ator Burrows," altliough he is officially known to the Senate as clerk 
to the Committee on Revision of tiie Laws. 

Why did not Mr. Rose tell the readers of tlu! Ihrahl the important 
fact that since Julius C;esar liurrows was made chaiiinan of the 



17 

important (?) Committee on Revision of the Laws, on December 30, 
1895, not one single bill, petition, or resolution has been referred to 
the committee, that but one meeting has been held, and that meet- 
ing was a sort of social gathering in January, 1896, which convened 
at the request of Chairman Buirows mainly for the purpose of ap- 
proving the highly commendable and proper selection of Mr. Rose 
as clerk of a committee which never has any business referred to it, 
and, consequently, never meets ! Of course Mr. Rose was too loyal 
to his chairman — as well as to himself — to ssij that, bu'. the truth 
should be told, " even though the heavens fall." 

In the summer of 1882 the Senate Committee on Rules met in 
recess for the ])arpose of revising the rnles of the Senate, and unan- 
imously agreed to recommend the abolition or " extinguishment " 
of the Committee on Revision of the Laws, as being useless and un- 
necessary. Before making its final report, however, as a matter of 
" Senatorial courtesy " — at the request of the Senator then chairman 
of that committee — said recommendation was omitted. 

I have no means at present of " searching the record," but I will 
bet Mr. Rose a barrel of cider or " winter pippins " that the Com- 
mittee on the Revision of the Laws of the Senate has not reported 
five bills during the last fifteen years. So much for the "importance" 
of that committee. 

Then Mr. Rose says his chairman is a " member of the important 
committees on Privileges and Elections, Claims, Coast Defences, and 
Banks and Banking." 

A Reference to Mr. "Gas Addicks." 

Now, this is not only disingenuous — not to say grossly inaccurate — 
in Mr. Rose, but it is a clear case of n'l'jjpressio veri with the usual 
accompaniment of suggestio falsi . I don't want Mr. Rose to think, 
and trust he will not think, I am imitating Daniel O'Connell in a 
notable incident in a London fish market and slinging epithets or 
opprobrious language at him. But the fact must be told. The 
Committee on Privileges and Elections " in days gone by " was a 
committee of responsibilit}', honor, and dignity. For many years 
past it has followed the bad rule of the House committee, so aptly 
stated by Thad. Stevens, of " sticking by its own d — d rascal." Its 
reports and recommendations have been so frequently reversed by 
the Senate of late that it is now "rated" as a second-class com- 
mittee, though it has always had some strong men on it. The 
principal service that Mr. Rose's chairman has rendered on that 
committee consists in championing the absurd claims of the notorious 
" Gas " Addicks of Delaware to a seat in the Senate — to which no 
honest man of average intelligence Avill say he was elected — and, by 
reversing his vote — first given in favor of Henry A. DuPont — denying 
that gentleman his seat on a petty technicality, and, as a result, 
seating a silver Democrat from that State. 

The Committee on Post-offices and Post Roads is a good com- 
mittee, but there is nothing on that committee for " Nat " McKay, 
and Mr. Burrows will soon disappear from it. 



18 

Mk. Burrows' Friend Mr. McKay. 

As to the Committee on Claims — to which Mr. Burrows was 
assigned at his own request — it is only necessary to say that the 
principal work performed by Mr. Rose's chairman on that committee 
consists in reporting sundry large claims — priucipallj' of contracts 
for " irou-clads " built during the late war — in which Mr. Nathaniel 
McKay, the leading Wasliington " promoter of legislation," is largely 
interested. As Mr. McKay is known to have assisted in " pro- 
moting" the election of Mr. Rose's chairman to the Senate, and as 
he gave him a swell dinner on his arrival in Washington in January, 
1895, as Senator-elect, it may be possible that this is akin to the 
incident of Sam Weller's upset of the coach of the opposing voters — 
a " mere coincidence." 

The Committee on Coast Defenses — like that of Revision of the 
Laws — is a mere ornamental committee, which exists solely to give 
a new Senator (McBride, of Oregon) a clerk and a committee room. 

Cuts No Ice. 

As to the Committee on Banks and Banking referred to by Mr. 
Rose, it is only necessary to say there is no such committee. There 
is, however, a Committee on National Banks — another ornamental 
committee — created in the Fifty-third Congress, to give a new 
Democratic Senator a clerk and committee room. It is a select or 
temporary committee, however, and its chairman is Senator Mantle, 
of Montana — silver Republican — who, with the two Democratic 
members, makes the committee " agin the banks." Fortunately for 
the interests of the national banks, the committee never meets. 

How Mr. Burrows Got There. 

Mr. Rose speaks with exceeding joy of the fact that his cliairman 
is a member of the important committee on finance, but again he is 
disingenuous, and, I regret to say, is again guilty of suppressio veri 
combined with snggestio falsi. There Avas a strife for the vacancy 
caused by the resignation of Senator Sherman, and the names of 
two Western Senators — Hanna and Thurston — were first mentioned 
for the place. The real candidates, however, were Senators Piatt, 
of New York; Sewell, of New Jersey, and Mr. Rose's chairman. 
The vacancy properly belonged to the West, as the chairman (Mor- 
rill, of Vermont), Aldrich, of Rliode Island, and Piatt, of Connecti- 
cut, were from the East, and the retiring StMiator i Sherman) was a 
Western man. Seiuitor Piatt, of New York, claimed the place by 
reason of his previous service in the Senate and because he was the 
sole Repul)li('an Senator from the Empire State. 

A Case of Jones. 

The Western Republican Senators had the " bulge " on their East- 
ern brethren in tliis matter, for they had Jones, of Nevada, beliind 
them, without whose vote they could not " turn a wheel " in the 
finance committee. Senator Jones' demands were few, but they 



19 

were imperative, aud at the very front was his demand on behalf of 
the Northwestern (silver) States for a dut}' of 20 per cent, on hides. 
What mattered it to him that free hides was an established Repub- 
lican principle or doctrine? What mattered it that no duty had 
ever been imposed on hides until 1842, when a dut}- of 5 per cent, 
was imposed for revenue ; that it was reduced to 4 per cent, b}- the 
Walker tariff of 1846 ; that it was restored to 5 per cent, by the 
act of 1857; that it was increased by the Morrill "War Tariff" 
act of August, 1861, to only 10 per cent.; that it was repealed by the 
act of 1872, when revenue was no longer needed, aud that no duty 
Avas ever proposed in either house of Congress pending the acts of 
1883, 1890, aud 1894 ? His constituents in Nevada— a grand total 
of 10,323 at the last election in that State — the great " cattle barons " 
of Texas and the millionaire " packers " of Chicago, Kansas City, 
and elsewhere, Avanted this duty, aud it was a part of his " ultima- 
tum." 

Senator Julius Ciiesar Burrows, when a member of the Committee 
on Ways aud Means of the House of Representatives in the Fifty- 
first Congress, voted against a proposed duty. He had heard Major 
McKinley, in the Ways aud Means Committee room, read to the 
Republican members the following letter from Secretary Blaine on 
this subject : 

The Yoice of Blaine on Hides. 

Washington, D. C, April 10, 1890. 
Dear Mr. McKinley : It is a great mistake to take hides from the 
free list, where they have been for so many years. It is a slap in 
the face to the South Americans with whom we are trying to enlarge 
our trade. It will benefit the farmer by adding 5 to 8 per cent, to 
the price of his children's shoes. It will yield a profit to the butcher 
only — the last man that needs it. The movement is injudicious from 
beginning to end — in every form aud phase. Pray stop it before it 
sees light. Such movements as this for protection will protect the 
Republican party into a speedy retirement. 
Yours hastily, 

JAMES G. BLAINE. 

Was Burrows a Traitor? 

Senator Burrows well kuew that the sentiment of the Republican 
voters of Michigan was overwhelmingly against a duty on hides. 
He knew that the great tanning, shoe, and leather industries of 
Michigan had been adjusted to the stable Republican polic}' of free 
hides, and that any duty whatever Avas a serious bloAv to them. He 
kuew that no farmer in Michigan or elsewhere raised cattle for their 
hides ; that beef was the sole consideration ; that the supply was 
regulated wholly by the demand for beef, and that a duty on hides 
would not increase or decrease the domestic product by one single 
hide, and that no farmer would be benefited a nickel by a duty, 
Avhile, ou the contrary, it Avould destroy our growing export trade 



'JO 

and incre.ase the prices of shoes to tlie farmer's family " from 5 to 8 
per cent." He knew all this, for he had said so in a speech ; but 
iDeyond that he knew it from able and experienced men, such as 
" Uncle Jim " Monroe of Kalamazoo, and Judge Marsdeu Burch of 
Grand Rapids, who made special trips to Washington to urge him 
to rightly represent the great and important interests of Michigan 
in respect to this matter by voting against the proposed or any duty 
on hides. 

These gentlemen were his principal " managers " in his contest 
for the Senatorship ; they were in close touch with the Republican 
voters of Michigan, and they told him that he would make the mis- 
take of his political career if he voted for any duty on hides. 

This is a Serious Charge, 

Why did he not listen to them and the scores of petitions and 
protests he had received from his constituents? The answer is easy 
and short. Senator Julius Csesar Burrows promised not onl}' to sup- 
port the proposed duty on hides which Senator John P. Jones of 
Nevada demanded, but made other pledges to vote against the in- 
terests of Michigan in order to get on the finance committee, and the 
thing was settled. 

When Mr. Rose says that Senator Burrows was assigned to the 
finance committee " by almost a unanimous vote," he states what is 
grossly incorrect, and when he says that " the question of fitness 
alone determined his selection," he states, what is not true. 

The bill, with several hundred amendments, was already reported 
to the Senate when Mr. Burrows was appointed a member of the 
finance committee, and while, as a matter of course, the " compro- 
mises " between the two houses were yet to be made, the men who 
made them Avere Senators Allison, Aldrich, and Jones, of Nevada. 
Notiiing is better known tlian that. Julius Caesar Burrows was a 
mere fly on the steer's horn, and, save when he violated all parlia- 
mentary law and propriety and voted — as a conferee — against the 
instructions of the Senate on the two-dollar lumber vote, he was as 
unimportant and inconsequential — save that he had a vote — as the 
nuissenger of the committee. 

Senator McMillan Responsible for Burrows' Ai'Pointment on the 

Finance Committee. 

But with the support of Jones, of Nevada, and the " odds and 
ends" he could pick n\) for the place, he would have ignominiously 
failed to reach the prize had Scniator McMillan not been chairman 
of the " Committee on (/ommittees," sometimes designated as the 
caucus or " steering committee." Senator McMillan stands high in 
the Senate and has the confidence of that body. He has rendered 
Michigan valuable and important service — more, perhajis, in one 
session than Julius Ca\sar Ibirrows has rendered during iiis entire 
three years in the Senate — and it was possible for him, after having 
tactfully arranged committi'c pl;i<u>s for otiuir Sciiatois. to ask a 



21 

favor — not for himself — but for the State of Michigan. Looking 
to its important and varied tariff interests, Avhat more natural 
than that Senator McMillan, then voluntarily out of the race 
for a third terra, should desire to place his colleague where he 
could be of " some service to the State." It never entered his 
mind for a second that Mr. Burrows could be so false and 
recreant to the interests of Michigan as to vote for a duty 
on hides in spite of the overwhelming sentiment of the great 
tanning and leather interests of Michigan represented here by 
his trusted lieutenants "Uncle Jim" Monroe and Judge Burch. 
Is it possible that he would have made that assignment had he 
supposed for a second that his colleague would have been false to 
the interests of nine-tenths of the people of Michigan on the lumber 
schedule? An honest man himself, lie never thought a Senator 
could be guilty of such perfidy and treachery, leaving out the theory 
of corrupt motives, and he fully believed he could control the junior 
Senator ou these questions. Indeed, it is more than probable that 
he believed that self-interest alone and the advice of " Uncle Jim " 
Monroe would keep his colleague right. He did not kuow^ Julius 
Cneser Burrows then, but he knows him now, and I shall be sur- 
prised if, in the face and teeth of the exposure of the career and 
character of that colossal demagogue and hypocrite and political 
and personal " rotten -egg " individual, yoked to lobbyist "Nat" 
McKa}' wuth hooks of steal, he will, when the time comes, give his 
influence and support to the re-election of Julius Ca3sar Burrows, 
whose character and standing in the Senate before January 1, 1898, 
wall be a disgrace to the State of Michigan and a reproach to the 
Senate and nation. 

A BuEROws Incident. 

The Constitution of the United States (article 1, section 7, clause 
1) provides that " all bills for raising revenue shall originate in the 
House of Representatives." 

Prior to his election to the Senate, Senator Burrows had served, 
at intervals, 16 years in the House of Representatives, and eight 
years ou the Committee on Ways and Means. During that service he 
had voted on a proposition denying to the Senate the right to origi- 
nate either a revenue or general appropriation bill. 

Yet on the 27th day of December, 1$95, in the first session of the 
Fifty-fourth Congress, with that majestic dignity which is his dis- 
tinguishing characteristic, he rose in the Senate, secured the atten- 
tion of the Chair and attempted to introduce a revenue (tariff) bill. 

In order to do Mr. Rose's chairman even and exact justice, I 
quote from the Record the entire " incident." 

" Mr. BuRROW^s. I introduce a bill, and, if I may be indulged a word 
in explanation, it will avoid the necessity of reading the bill in ex- 
tenso. By the tariff act of 18i)o a large niamber of articles were 
placed on the free list hitherto dutiable. By the measure which 
has just passed the House of Representatives (H. R. 2749, to tem- 
porarily increase revenue and meet the expenses of the Government 



22 

aiul provide against a deficiency) the rate of taxation of the dutiable 
list, as it now exists, has been increased, but the articles made free 
by the Wilson act, with the exception of wool and lumber, remain 
on the free list. The bill I propose is to restore to the dutiable list 
the articles taxable under the law of 1890, imposing upon them a 
rate of duty in harmony with the bill just passed by the House of 
Kepresentatives. 

" Mr. Shekman. I wish to call the attention of the Senator from 
Michigan to the fact that this body has no right to originate a bill 
imposing duties on imported goods, or in any measure a revenue 
bill ; therefore, the bill should be ofifered in the nature of an amend- 
ment to the House bill." 

Here's the Nut of It. 

" Mr. Burrows. I intended to offer the bill that it might be re- 
ferred to the Committee on Finance and considered by that com- 
mittee, with the hope that it would be engrafted as an amendment 
of the revenue bill. Of coui'se I was aware of the fact that 
revenue measures cannot originate in the Senate. 

" Mr. Sherman. It is contrary to the Constitution for the Senate to 
attempt such legislation, except in the way of an amendment to the 
House bill. I think it had better be introduced as an amendment. 

" Mr. Burrows. I will offer it as an amendment. 

" The Vice-President. The proposed amendment will be referred 
to the Committee on Finance." 

I happened to be in the Senate gallery at the time, and observed 
the confusion of Senator Burrows on account of the quite general 
laughter on both sides of the chamber which followed the friendly 
advice given him by Senator Sherman. I heard the entire; affair, 
and the words in full-face type were not spoken b}^ Senator Bur- 
rows on the floor, but were inserted bj' him as an afterthonght to 
cover up his ignorance. 

Smith Had a Chance to Know. 

It will be observed that he repeatedly refers to the bill he had 
" introduced," and that in the very paragraph in which he interpo- 
lated the fuU-face-type words he says : " I intended to offer the 
bill," etc., and yet this " afterthought" does not agree or " consist " 
with his "forethought." And yet Mr. Rose would deceive tlie 
Herald readers l)y making them believe that Mr. Burrows was ap- 
pointed on the finance coinmittee by reason of his long service on 
the Ways and Means Committee of the House and his pre-eminent 
fitness for the place. That service as stated had absolutely nothing 
to do with his selecition on the finance committee. 

During nearly all of Mr. Iburows' service in the House I had, as 
journal clerk of the House, the very best opjiortunity to know his 
status and about his work, and I have no hesitation in saying that, 
beyond a sophomoric speech full of " glittering generalities," he had 
but little to sav about the details of the McKinley bill, and when 



23 

the proper time arrives I will show that he was so badly " worsted " 
in a five-miuute debate that his only escape from utter humiliation 
was to change his remarks in the Record. 

The Conference Committee. 

Finally, as to the appointment of Mr. Rose's chairman as a 
member of the committee on conference on the tariff bill. There 
is no rule of either house of Conpjress fixing the number of con- 
ferrees on a bill or subject in dispute between the two houses. 
Until the tariff act of 1883, a conference committee was composed 
of three members of each body, two of the majority and the third of 
the minority party. It was then increased to five members aud on 
the McKinley bill to seven, the same number on the Wilson-Gorman 
act of 1894. As the House accepted verb, et lit. the Senate amend- 
ments to that bill, the Republican conferrees had nothing to do. 

When the Dingley bill passed the Senate, a conference with the 
House was moved by Senator Allison, and the number of conferrees 
of each house fixed at eight. This had all been arranged before- 
hand with Speaker Reed and Chairman Dingley and was done to 
"compose " — so to speak — an embarrassing situation in each house, 
or rather in the two committees of ways and means and finance. 
With a committee of seven, the House Republican conferrees would 
be — following their order of rank on the committee — Messrs, 
Dingley, of Maine, Payne, of New York, Dalzell, of Pennsylvania, 
and Hopkins, of Illinois. 

On Grosvenor's Account. 

General Grosvenor, of Ohio, was extremely anxious to be a con- 
ferree in order to look after the wool interests of Ohio, and Senator 
Hanaa was extremely anxious that he should be. Speaker Reed 
refused to advance Grosvenor over Hopkins, and as there was a 
general feeling on the part of the Republican managers that there 
were too many Eastern members on the conference, the proposition 
of an increase was readily agreed to by Senator Jones, of Nevada, 
who desired the assistance of Senator Burrows in retaining the 
Senate amendment fixing a duty of 20 per cent, on hides as well as 
in respect to certain other Senate amendments. But for this con- 
dition of affairs Senator Burrows would not have been a member 
of the conference committee, while it is worthy of note that he was 
not appointed a member of the finance committee until after the 
Dingley bill had been reported to the Senate. 

Expensive for Michigan. 

The House conferrees fought valiantly against a duty on hides, 
and a majority of the Senate conferrees as valiantly for it. As a 
compromise, it was fixed at 15 per cent., with a drawback on all 
leather exported made from imported hides. As a result — it was 
stated by Senator Aldrich — this would bring in a revenue of 
$700,000, and that fully one-half that sum, if not over $400,000, 



24: 

would be paid out under tlie drawback provision. This would 
leave a net revenue ot" $300,000, at a cost to the tanuiuf^, shoe, and 
leather industries of Michigan alone of more than twice that sum. 

BUIIROWS AND THE LOOKING-GLASS. 

Mr. Rose is discreetly silent as to the part his chairman played in 
respect to the rates of duty on looking-glass plate. Perhaps the 
furniture manufacturers of Grand Rapids will be interested in 
knowing that in spite of the almost frantic appeals of Senator 
Burrows to liis Republican associates on the conference committee, 
and his frenzied declaration that his political salvation depended on 
getting the glass schedule fixed as he desired, his associates were 
deaf, dumb, and probably blind, as well as indifferent, to his 
" political salvation," and the best he could get was a reduction of 
rates that will not help tiie entire furnitme interests of Grand 
Rapids $1,000 a yeair. 

Ah! How About Lumber? 

Mr. Rose refers to the appointment of his chairman on the con- 
ference committee as a " second great honor," and joyfully remarks 
that he " can conceive of nothing Senator Burrows could have 
received during the extraordinary session of Congress that would 
have added anything to his credit or honor." Mr. Rose is discreetly 
silent in respect to the conduct of his chairman as a member of the 
conference committee in respect to lumber. By a yea and uaj^ vote 
on July 1, the Senate fixed the rate at $1 per thousand on white 
pine, and under the unbroken practice in both houses of Congress, 
he was in honor bound to adhere to that expression of the Senate 
in respect to that rate. 

There is no occasion for me to discuss the ])ropriety of the vote 
of Mr. Burrows in the Senate for a $2 rate. He so voted, and was 
defeated by the Senate, and when the subject of selecting the number 
as well as names of confei'rees on the part of the Senate was under 
consideration, the veteran chairman of the finance committee (Senator 
Morrill of Vermont) discussed this identical question with Senators 
Allison, Aldrich, and Piatt, of Connecticut, the other Republican 
members of the finance committee. Senator Morrill was in favor of 
the rate which was fixed by the McKinley law of 1890 at $1 per 
thousand, for which Mr. Burrows then voted, and he also voted in 
the Committee of Ways and Means against an amendment fixing the 
rate at $2 per thousand. 

Turned Down His Chairman. 

Senator Morrill insisted that the vote of the Senate on this subject 
should al)solutely control the couferrees, under the long established 
])ractic(' of the Senate. He was assured that such would be the 
action of the Senate conferrees, and yet it is authoritativel}- stated 
that from the moment the Republican couferrees met to consider 
the diffensnces between the two houses of Congress, Senator Burrows 



25 

commenced his labors to defeat the expressed will and order of the 
Senate in regard to this duty. All the usages and proprieties in the 
matter were thrown to the Avinds by Senator Burrows, who fought 
desperately for the $2 rate. His course at the time w-as severely 
criticised by his Republican colleagues on the committee, as well as 
other members of the Senate, and he was called sharply to account 
for it on the floor of the Senate, but he remained mute. What has 
Mr. Rose or his chairman to say in defense of that action, which, I 
venture to say, is without precedent ? Senator Burrows took 
advantage of the grave situation of aifairs, when it w-as barely 
possible to obtain and hold a quorum of Republican Senators, to 
force his Republican colleagues on the conference committee to 
recede from that amendment and yield to the Hoiise couferrees. I 
challenge him or any other man to point to a single precedent where 
the yea and nay vote of the Senate on an important question was 
overridden and defied in this way. 

Why Mr. Smith Writes. 

This letter has been written hastily and under the great dis- 
advantage of being a hundred miles from Washington, without 
access to important details. Regarding it as a duty to point out the 
gross misstatements made by Mr. Rose in respect to the record and 
status of his chairman in the Senate of the United States, 1 have 
written the foregoing, and submit it for the information not onl}^ of 
the readers of the Herald, but of the Republican voters of Michigan 
who have a right to call Senator Burrows to account for his conduct 
and votes in the Senate. 

HENRY H. SMITH. 

Front Royal, Va., Ang. 19, 1897. 



The Editor of the Grand Rapids Herald, Mr. E. D. Conger, ac- 
knowledged the receipt of my letter, as follows : 

Grand Rapids Herald, 

Grand Rapids, Mich., Aug. 21, '97. 
Mr. Henry H. Smith, 

40-41 Kellogg Bldg., Washington, D. C. 

Dear Sir : Yours of the 19th inst. enclosing communication for 
publication was received this morning. 

I have carefully read your article and concluded that for the 
present, at least, we do not care to publish same in the Herald. 
With your permission, however, I Avill retain jour manuscript, as it 
is not impossible that at some future time we will want to avail our- 
selves of the information and statements contained therein. 
Yours very truly, 

E. D. CONGER, 

Manager. 



26 

\Dei7'oit Neti's Editorial.'] 

(Tuesday, Aug. 24, 1897.) 

HARRY SMITH'S ANALYSIS OF SENATOR BURROWS. 

Mr. Henry M. Rose's receut labored defense of the record of 
Senator Julias C. Burrows, whose private secretary he is, has called 
out a most interesting letter from the pen of Mr. Henry H. Smith, 
former journal clerk of the House, than whom few men are more 
conversant with either the ways of the Kalamazoo statesman or the 
methods by which legislative affairs are conducted at Washington. 
Having known and observed Johnny Blodgett's Senator for many 
years, Mr. Smith naturally falls short of the admiration which Mr. 
Rose feels for the man Avliose influence keeps him in touch with a 
comfortable salary, and he cruelly exposes the fallacies contained in 
the secretary's eulogistic interview. 

First off, he reveals with unpitying fidelity the meaningless char- 
acter of several of the honors and dignities with which the faithful 
secretary has sought to create an atmosphere of greatness for his 
Senator. He points out that two of the Senator's "important" 
committees, including that on " Revision of Laws," of which he is 
chairman, are purely ornamental and without influence in legislation. 
Next he proceeds to call attention to the fact that Mr. Burrows' 
most notable action as a member of the discredited Committee on 
Privileges and Elections has been his championship of the notorious 
" Gas " Addicks, of Delaware, whose eftVontery in aspiring to a seat 
in the Senate to which he was not elected shocked decent men of 
all parties throughout the country'. It is also notable that this 
championship Anally resulted in the seating of a silver Democrat in 
])lace of Mr. Dupont, who was the other Republican claimant. 

With regard to the Senator's membership in the Committee on 
Claims, Mr. Smith appeals to the record to show that its greatest 
activit}' has been in })romoting claims in which Nathaniel McKa}^ a 
prominent lobbyist who banqueted Mr. Burrows when he returned 
to Washington as a Senator, is interested. 

At this point the merciless presenter of facts leaves the lesser for 
the greater and comes down to the Burrows record in the recent 
tariff' contest, and the showing is one under which the junior Senator 
must wince. In reply to Mr. Rose's statement that " the question 
of fitness alone determined his (Senator Burrows') selection " as a 
member of the Committee on Finance, Mr. Smith charges circum- 
stantially and with corroborative testimony that the appointment 
was secured at the price of a promise to support Senator John P. 
Jones' indefensible duty on hides and of other pledges inimical to 
the best interests of jNIicliigan. Mr. Smith's (exposition of the facts 
concerning the hide duty is caustic, and his argunnrnt relating to the 
manner in which Senator Burrows became a member of the com- 
mittee convincing. These charges he supplements with a showing 
that, with all his boasted influence, the Senator was unable to do 
auvthiuj' considerabh^ for th(! furniture interests of the State in the 



27 

matter of looking-glass plate, and then he comes down to the lumber 
schedule, in the contest over which Senator Burrows violated every 
precedent of the Senate in order to pay his debts to political friends 
who demanded the $2 rate on white pine. Mr. Smith challenges 
the Senator or his friends to find another instance in which a mem- 
ber of a conference committee betrayed the confidence of the Senate 
by going against its policy declared in a yea and nay vote. 

Taken all in all, the document Mr. Smith has produced is likely 
to keep the Senator, the Senator's secretary, and the Senator's re- 
maining friends feverishly busy during the months that remain be- 
fore the question of selecting his successor is decided. 



The letter of Hon. Arthur Hill is so appropriate as a clincher to 
my statement of the tricker}^ treachery, and dishonesty of Julius 
CjBser Burrows that I insert it here with the remark that he has not 
yet told all he knows about the " Columbian Orator." It will be in- 
teresting when the fact develops — as it will — that the other " con- 
feree " who sold out his State, party, and character, is also one of 
lobbyist "Nat" McKay's regular "guests," and that " Nat " very 
properly acted as driver on the occasion referred to. 

Who'll be the next victim ? 

SAYS BURROWS IS A BETRAYER. 



LUMBERMAN HILL AFTER THE JUNIOR SENATOR. 



OPEN LETTER ABOUNDING IN PERTINENT QUESTIONS. 



HIS INTIMACY WITH NAT McKAY BROUGHT OUT. 



BURROWS'S TOTE FOR MISSISSIPPI AGAINST MICHIGAN. 

Saginaw, Mich., Dec. 14. — Hon. Arthur Hill, Saginaw's wealthy 
and prominent lumberman, has addressed the following open letter 
to Senator J. C. Burrows : 

Hon. J. C. Burrows, United States Senate, Washington, D. C, 
Sir : Four years ago you were elected to represent the State of 
Michigan and its people in the United States Senate. On July 24, 
1897, pending the final passage of the Dingley tariff bill, you ad- 
dressed the Senate in advocacy of a $2 duty on white pine lumber, 
and you said : 



28 

" I am uware of the faot that the people of my own State are 
someAvhat divided upon this question, and if I was a protectionist 
for Michigan only, the question would be a very difficult and em- 
barrassing one for me to solve. 

" In considering this question I look beyond the State of Michi- 
gan to discover, if possible, the magnitude and needs of this great 
industry." 

You then went forward and presented this telegram : 

" Hattiesuurg, Miss., July 6, 1897. — We implore you and other 
friendly senators to prevent reduction of $1 duty on Avhite pine 
lumber. Discrepancy in freight rates in favor of Canada over the 
south has already destroyed yellow pine industry. Without §2 pro- 
tection we cannot expect to survive. 

" B. J. NEWMAN LUMBEK CO." 

But, Senator, when you thus looked " beyond " the State of Mich- 
igan to Mississippi, why did you not state to your colleagues that 
Mr. Blodgett, of Grand Rapids, Mich., was the owner of an immense 
tract of yellow pine timber, equal to half a count}', in the immediate 
vicinit}^ of Hattiesburg, Miss., and that as to this telegram, as you 
well knew, the hand was Newman's but the voice was Blodgett's ? 

Your only mention of Mr. Blodgett's name is where you defend 
him against tlie charge made in the debate, that he was " the man 
who manipulates the election of Senators from Michigan." 

And while you were looking " beyond " the State of Michigan, to 
Grand Rapids via Mississippi, for reasons for advocating the ^2 
lumber duty, you knew, as you stated, that the people of your own 
State "were somewhat divided on the question." 

Gubernatorial OrrosiTioN. 

You knew that opposed to the doubling of the McKiuley duty of 
$1 per 1,000 on pine lumber was our entire line of living Repub- 
lican Governors — Hazen S. Pingree, John T. Rich, Cyrus G. Luce, 
and Russell A. Alger. 

They believed tliat a %\ duty was all the people ought to pay, and 
also that to increase the rate would seriously disturb the woodwork- 
ing industries of Michigan. 

You knew, too, that it was opposed as unwise and unfair by Hon. 
Dexter M. F«nTy, chairman of the Republican State Central Com- 
mittee, and by such true Republicans and broadminded business 
men connected with the lumber industry as D. Whitney, Jr., of De- 
troit, Ezra Rust, of Saginaw, and Ammi W. Wright, of Alma, and by 
Dr. David Ward, of Detroit, who owns more standing ]nne in Mich- 
igan than any other five men in the State. 

You had heard read, too, the protest signed by 2G of our leading 
mill and lumbering firms, setting forth that if a %"! duty were placed 
on white pine lumber, Canada would so legislate as to prevent them 
from getting their Canadian cut logs to their Michigan mills (and 
this Icgishitioii has since been enacted iind is now in force); and you 



29 

still looked " beyond " Michigan and settled the question in favor of 
Mississippi. 

I understand and regret the relations which made the problem an 
embarrassing one for jou to solve in favor of your own State, but 
this I can plainly say : that no member of the Senate had so little 
right to vote the duty on white pine lumber from $1 to $2 per 1,000, 
with its inevitable consequences, as yourself. 

You were familiar with the position of Michigan on the lumber 
tariff question, for it was before you as a member of the Waj^s and 
Means Committee of the House continually for consideration. 

Our State was for years the leading producer of white pine lumber 
and defended the $2 duty down to the time of the passage of the 
McKinley bill in 1890, when a change in circumstances led to a 
change of policy. The Michigan pineries were becoming exhausted. 
Our mills were beginning to draw on Canada for logs. The Amer- 
ican import duty on lumber was $2 per thousand and the Canadian 
export duty on logs was also $2. 

BuRROws's Night Visits. 

The House and Senate finally agreed on a lumber schedule provid- 
ing in effect that if Canada would abolish the export duty on logs 
the duty on lumber would be reduced to $1 per thousand and, as 
you will recall, sir, the very clause which covered this provision for 
$1 duty on lumber and free logs was framed, or at least presented, 
by yourself, who, at the time, represented the interests of the people 
of the State of Michigan. 

Seven years later, when our lumbermen, under this arrangement, 
have invested millions of dollars in Canadian pineries, and with the 
merest remnant of our own white pine left, you vote back the $2 
duty and cut off the log supply, and shut down the mills and fac- 
tories, and bring serious loss, and in some cases ruin, to men who 
put money into Canadian timber to keep alive their buisness in 
Michigan. 

Why did you represent Michigan in 1890 and Mississip])i in 
1897 ? 

And with this question answered, there is yet another which, as 
one of your constituency, I have the right to ask. It relates to the 
means you took to get the lumber duty fixed at $2, after that rate 
had been voted down in the Senate. 

Was This Done by Bribery? 

The Finance Committee, of which you were a member, reported to 
the Senate a $2 lumber duty. The Senate later voted down the 
duty from |2 to $1 per thousand over your head, and it was thus 
sent to the Conference Committee. As a member of the Finance 
Committee 3'ou became one of the Joint Conference Committee, and 
from the hour you were appointed to uphold the $1 rate in the 
Conference Committee you used every art and artifice in outrage 
both of precedent and common political decency to have the duty 
fixed at 12. 



30 

You made night visits to the quarters of the Blodgett committee 
to phiu aud to conspire, and you did more, and I fear worse. 

You drove to the liotel of a member of the Conference Committee 
who from the first had been iu favor of the $1 duty. After the vote 
of tlie Senate fixing tliat rate, I heard him congratuhite a gentleman 
engaged in the tight and say to him, " One dollar is enough and 
they ought not to ask for more." 

" Nat " McKay in the Lumber Job. 

You drove off with this member of the Conference Committee in 
the dusk of the evening, and the driver was Nat McKay, the notori- 
ous lobbyist. The return was far iu the night. Next morning a 
member of Congress from the gentleman's own State called on him 
with telegrams from his people protesting against anything higher 
than the $1 duty, the newspapers having reported that a rate of SI. 50 
was possible. Imagine that Congressman's sur})rise at being told b}' 
your companion of the night before that he had changed his mind 
and now believed that a $2 rate on lumber was a fair one. 

Pertinent Question. 

Now, Senator Burrows, whose was the argument, yours or Mr. 
Nat McKay's, and what was the argument, that brought about, as iu 
the twinkling of an eye, this conversion ? It seems as miraculous 
and surely as sudden as that of Saul, but I fear the light that shone 
on the gentleman was not from heaven. 

A few words personal about myself, for this is a personal letter, 
yet thinking it may a little concern the public I give it to the public, 
too. 

I never asked, directly or indirectly, for the legislation of 1890, 
but, resting on it, I made oq both sides of the boundary considerable 
investments. By the passage of the J^ingle}' bill the investment on 
this side was ruined, and it is now closed out. My loss is made 
aud my loss is paid, and for myself I care not whether the lumber 
duty be $1 or $2. 

Michigan's Honor at Stake. 

J^ut I do care mightily whether tlie honor of the State is in safe 
hands at Washington : wiiether her vote is trafficked and sold : 
whether lier Senator is the friend and consort of a lobbyist, Avhom 
he brings to Michigan to aid by midnight McKay methods in his 
re-election. 

And I do care to see elected to the Senate some man as clean as 
he is ca[)able, who will l)e no man's man but will belong to the 
whole people and serve the whole peo))le. 

And here are some questions for the people themselves to answer : 

Is there a man, as charged iu the debate, who " manipulates the 
election of Senators from Michigan " ? 

Can he succeed in sending biu^k to Washington from Michigan 
tlie Senatoi- who represents there the manipulator and Missis- 
sippi ? 



31 

With a profound trust in the people and the people's representa- 
tives, who know their rights and who know their wrongs, I await 
the answer to be given at Lansing to these questions. 

ARTHUR HILL. 

Saginaw, Mich., Dec. 13, 1898. 

Nothing could be more appropriate than to quote here the follow- 
ing extract from the Nortkwestern Lumhcrman of February 28, 1897. 
That i^aper was quoted by Senator Barrows with high approval dur- 
ing the debate on the lumber schedule, and when this damning para- 
graph was read by Senator Pettigrew on the floor of the Senate this 
servile tool of the lumber " barons " — Julius Caesar Buri'ows — 
flinched and retired to the cloak-room to recover his composure. 
The extract is as follows : 

" Now, you take our average cut of the United States, and $1 a 
thousand advance means what? It means $35,000,000 to the lum- 
berman of the United States in a year. So, if we carry out this idea, 
$1 duty does not take it to that. Lumber in Canada would come 
down a whole dollar, and it would not help us any. Get it up to 
about $2 and then it would begin to have its effect. To illustrate a 
little further : There was a lot of gentlemen from the Northwest, up 
Minnesota way, in Washington the other day, and they were sitting 
in Senator Burrows' committee room. An interesting incident oc- 
curred there. Senator Burrows is chairman of the committee. The 
committee had not had a meeting for a long time. We happened 
to be sitting in that room, and one of the gentlemen from Minne- 
sota had an envelope and a lead pencil. He walked around the 
room and he ciphered out a little bit, and he said : ' Mr. Burrows, 
do you know what %\ a thousand would mean to this little crowd of 
men here ? ' There were not as many in the room as there are here. 
He said the advance of $1 a thousand on lumber meant 10,125,000 
on last year's product." 



[From the Detroit News, Sept. 22. 1898.] 

NAT" M'KATS "DEAR FRIEND." 

HOW THE CAPITAL BELSHAZZAR TREATS BURROWS. 
Magnificence of the Senatorial " Spider Web." 



A FEAST THAT ONE MICHIGANDER WON'T FORGET. 

COLD NERVE PARADING LOBBYIST IN MICHIGAN. 

The intimacy between the most noted lobbyist in W^ashington, 
" Nat " McKay, and Michigan's Julius Ctesar Burrows has been the 



32 

subject of much corridor gossip during the past three da3^s. An 
iuflueutial member of the G. O. P. who has often visited Washington 
and knows of the close rehitions existing between Burrows and 
McKay, tells a good story. 

"Yes, Burrows is McKay's side partner, sure enough, in sociality 
at least," said the story-teller. "A friend of mine, who came down 
to AVashington while I was there, was lugged off by the Senator one 
evening to McKay's ' senatorial spider web,' and he had a bang-up 
time, as he told me afterward. 

" When my friend was approached by Burrows with an invitation 
to go up to McKay's, he demurred, saying he Avas not prepared ; 
that he did not know McKay, and would not feel at ease under the 
circumstances. 

" 'Oh, fudge,' that was no reason in the Senator's estimation. 
Mr. McKay was his dear friend, and ' ni}' friends are just as welcome 
as I am at Mr. McKay's table. Come along; you'll have a good 
time and meet several noted and influential members of the House 
and Senate. Informal, I assure you ; everything goes.' 

" My friend went, and he had a good time. Burrows was ap- 
parently as free in McKa3''s house as was the host himself. There 
was a magnificence about tlie place and its appointments that took 
the breath away from the visitor. Such a lavish display of hospi- 
tality my friend had never seen before. There were ' cold bottles ' 
and ' warm bottles ' and various other kinds of bottles. There was 
terrapin in tubs and all the delicacies that the market of Washing- 
ton or Baltimore or any other city could afford. It was a feast for 
the gods, and Belshazzar McKay seemed to rely upon his friend 
Burrows to lead in the entertainment of the guests. It was a sight 
to make the man from Michigan wonder where he was at, and at the 
same time threw a calcium light upon the methods by which lobby- 
ists [)nsh (claims through Congress for hundreds of thousands of 
dollars, although these same claims have been denounced and vetoed 
in years past. The service at the feast was attractive. 'The prettiest 
Creoles I have ever laid eyes on waited on us,' said my friend, ' and 
they were not tlie least of the charming features of McKay's palatial 
quarters.' For days the remembrance of his evening with Burrows 
and his friends lingered with tlie visitor from Michigan, and he oc- 
casionally in quiet company refers to it as one of the surprises of 
his life. 

'' That ' Damon ' Burrows should have the nerve to parade his 
'Pythias' McKay through his own State is the acme of assurance. 
He might have known that it would be the means of bringing his 
relations with the notorious claim agtuit to the attention of his con- 
stituents. It was a brazen, foolish move, which he may have reason 
to regret." 

Tlie " influential member of the G. O. P" is the editor of a lead- 
ing daily llepublican paper published many miles from Detroit and 
the person taken to one of McKay's " banquets " is another prom- 
inent llepublican, who declined a nomination to the legislature in a 



I 



33 

sure district, but the member-elect is nov) a sure auti-Biirrows mem- 
ber though his convention endorsed the " Orator." All on account 
of Burrows' intimacy with " Nat " McKay. Here is a dispatch 
from Mr. Miller the reliable Washington correspondent of the JSfews, 
under date of September 22, tlie day after the State convention : 



NOT NEWS IN WASHINGTON 



BURROWS' CLOSENESS TO THE "KING OF THE 

LOBBYISTS." 



THE SENATOR'S ACTION TOWARD THE WHISKY TRUST. 



His Intimacy With the Big Sugar Brokers. 



PECULIAR FRIENDSHIPS OF THE SENATORIAL 
CANDIDATE. 



{From a Staff Correspondent.) 

W.\shinCtTON, Sept. '2'2i. — " I see that the people in Michigan are 
just learning of Senator Burrows' intimate relations with ' Nat ' 
McKay, king of the lobbj^" remarked one of the oldest and most 
reputable newspaper men in the capital. " That is stale news in 
Washington. There are other things about Barrows you should 
ask him to explain to the people of Michigan. I remember I used to 
entertain a high opinion of Burrows. When he introduced a reso- 
lution to investigate the whisky trust, I accordingly interviewed him 
for my paper, the Philadelphia Press. I printed a column and a 
half of what he gave me, in the shape of excellent reasons for the 
good of the morals of the country, why his resolution should go into 
execution. I handled the matter with a warm feeling of admiration 
for Mr. Burrows' rectitude and courage in protecting the American 
people. 

" But my ideal statesman from Michigan was smashed when 
Burrows abandoned the resolution. I have heard that whisky stock 
fluctuated six points on the effect of the resolution, but of course 
not being a speculator myself I have no means of knowing whether 
Burrows speculated on the fall and rise of whisky stock, although 
he must have known what effect his resolution would have upon it. 
But my respect for Burrows has never been restored." 

Another reporter who has made a specialty of writing financial 



34 

news for maDv years here, and stands high for accuracy and 
honesty, said : " I know Corson tfe McCartney', the big brokers, 
who handled sugar and other stocks during the sugar investigation, 
and wliile various tariff bills were pending. Indeed, I knew tliem 
very well, for I was employed by them to furnish financial news for 
about 12 years. Their office was ni}- headquarters. I know Senator 
Burrows very well. He was a frequent caller at Corson & Mc- 
Cartney's office. What was he there for ? Well, he wasn't there 
for his healtli, I reckon. If he was, I could have told him that it 
was not a healtliy place for a representative of the people. If 
people of 3'our State want to know about Senator Burrows before 
they agree to return him, why don't you ask him to explain wh}' he 
hung around Corson & McCartney's ? Why don't you have him 
explain his whisky trust resolution ? If he did not speculate, it 
will be easy for him to clear up the fog." 

MILLER. 



Julius ('{esjir Burrows Causes His Clerk, tlieu 

VVasliiuii^tou Correspoudeut Delroit Tribune, 

to Attack and Maliiiii Editor l)iui>:ley 

oltlie Kalamazoo Telei^raph 

ill January, 18*J4. 



BUEKOWS LIES ALL THE WAY THROUGH. 



On the 21st da}^ of January, 1894, the Detroit Tnljnne published 
the article given below, signed by its then Washington correspondent. 
Smith D. Fry. This publication was made during the second 
session of the 53d Congress, when Julius Caesar Burrows was a 
candidate for nomination to tiie following, 54th Congress. Mr. Fry 
is now, and for many years has been, one of the leading Washington 
correspondents. He conducts a large newspaper syndicate com- 
posed almost wholly of Western Rejiublican ])apers, and is also 
the corrcspoTidcnt of the Philadelpliia y'////ey (Independent). He is 
a Michigan man, at least by education, tliougli I do not recall his 
exact residence in tlie State. At the commencement of the 53d 
Congress, Mr. Fry made an anangement with Representative Julius 
Ca'sar Burrows to take tiie $100 allowed each member monthly for 
clerk hire and in consideration thereof furuisii a (tommodious room 
for him in the rear of Mr. Fry's newspaper office, which was then 
located at 1407 F st., almost directly op})osite my own office. I was 
then Assistant Register of the Treasur}', and was in the habit of 
dropping in the offices of Messrs. Burrows and Fry during the day, 



35 

usuall}' in the forenoon at Mr. Burrows' request, and in the evening 
to give^Mr. Fry whatever news items I might have. About a week 
or ten days prior to this pubHcation, I spent part of Suuda^^ after- 
noon and evening at Senator Stockbridge's. As had been their 
custom for several years, Representative and Mrs. Burrows had 
dined with the Senator and Mrs. Stockbridge. We were in the 
library smoking, that is to say, the Senator, the Representative, Mr. 
Schuyler S. Olds — Senator Stockbridge's secretary — and myself, and 
the ladies were in the parlor below. Suddenly Mr. Burrows " broke 
loose " in the most violent manner against Mr. Edward N. Dingley, 
editor of the Kalamazoo Telegraph, denouncing him in the most 
violent and bitter terms. He charged Mr. Dingley with being 
unfriendly and treacherous to him and of seeking to supplant him 
in Congress. He said that Mr. Dingley was unwilling to print his 
speeches or make anything more than bare mention of him and the 
things he did for his district in Washington except for pay. He 
said that he had recently made a tariff speech which had cost him 
a great deal of labor and time to collect and prepare, and which was 
being copied generally in Republican papers ; that he had written 
Mr. Dingley asking its publication in the Telegraph in full, or, at 
least, substantially so, and that Mr. Dingley had replied that it was 
impossible for him to print it except in supplement form, and that 
he would cheerfully print it if Mr. Burrows would pay the expense 
of composition and paper ; that Mr. Dingley had charged him 
exorbitant prices for work he had done at the TelegrapJt office ; 
that he was sick and tired of Dingley anyway, who was only a 
" nasty, mean, penurious little Yankee from Maine." He thereupon 
turned to me and said : 

" Harr}', I wish you would go to Kalamazoo and buy out Kendall 
and run this man Dingley ashore. I will raise the money to buy 
the paper, and will help you in every way in my power, and when 
the time comes, if the Senator is willing, will make you postmaster 
of Kalamazoo to help you out in this enterprise. The Telegrap>h is 
a ' dead weight ' on the party under Dingiey's management, and I 
want to freeze him out as quick as I can." 

I responded, laughingly, that I recalled several promises of his 
(Burrows) in 1874 about the Kalamazoo post-ofSce which had gone 
to protest, and that I had no inclination to go into an}^ newspaper 
enterprise at the present time, while I was certainly not willing to 
start in with a paper as a rival to the TeUgrapJi, of which I had 
formerly been editor and half owner. Senator Stockbridge then 
intervened, and, in his good-natured way, said : 

" Burrows, you get excited too easy ; you must take things philo- 
sophically. You ought to bear in mind that it takes money to run 
a good newspaper, and that there are mighty few count fy news- 
papers in Michigan, or elsewhere, which are making more than a 
living. You are too hard on Brother Dingley entirely. He has 
never overcharged me, and has always been very obliging." 

To this Mr. Burrows responded violently that — 

" The situation is different with you. Dingley is not a candidate 



36 

for your place, aud has no grudge or spite against you ; you have 
not a speech on the tariff which is being copied all over the country, 
and which Dingley ought to print in full, and you have not been 
subjected to the treatment at his hands that I have." 

Mr. Olds thereupon rallied Burrows about the matter, and after 
some further conversation, in which Mr. Burrows continued to de- 
nounce Mr. Dingley quite as bitterly as before, Mr. Burrows left in 
great haste, saying that he was going straight to his office, on F street, 
to have Smith Fry write up the matter for the Tr'thune and give 
Dingley a good " roast." As a matter of fact, Mr. Burrows did leave 
the house at once. A day or two afterwards Mr. Fry came to me 
with a typewritten article, which I recall as the substance of the 
dispatch printed in the IVthune of January 21, 1894. He said : 

" Harry, I am in a heap of trouble with Burrows about this arti- 
cle. He is ver}^ bitter against Dingley of the TelegVitph because of 
his refusal to print his (Burrows') tariff speech, and also because 
Dingley has refused to print other speeches of his. He dictated a 
very bitter and violent article which I have toned down and changed, 
and yet have made it pretty severe on Dingley. I am between two 
fires. I am getting $100 a month as Burrows' clerk, and am furnish- 
ing him with office room, stenographer, and messenger, to do such 
work as he may require in the mornings and evenings. I am also 
the correspondent of the Detriot Trihiue, receiving the same salary. 
This dispatch, if published, and I presume it will be, will raise h — 1. 
Dingley will come back at Burrows, and as a usual result, Burrows 
will ' crawl ;' then Mr. Gillett (managing editor of the Tribune) will 
get after me and will apologize to Dingley, which will leave me hang- 
ing in mid air. AVhat would you do ?" 

I replied that if Burrows insisted on it, I would send the dispatch 
and hold him responsible for it. I asked if Mr. Burrows had writ- 
ten out any portion of this matter. He said yes, he had written out 
several paragraphs, which he pointed out, and he indicated the line 
of attack he desired me to make. 

"Now," said Mr. Fry witli great earnestness, "I have a little per- 
sonal interest in this pul)lication, for the reason that I wrote or pro- 
cured the material for about one-half of Burrows' speech on the 
tariff, and I am rather proud of it, and think it is as good as any of 
the speeches which Burrows has ever read in Congress. I have, 
tlierefore, naturally ' spread it on very thick,' as you will observe. 
I do not know Dingley, and I have no grudge against him whatever, 
l)ut I am situated, as Henry Watterson would say, between ' Hell 
and the Iron Works,' and I have got to print this paragraph or lose 
this $100 a month from Burrows, as well as incur his enmity. He 
is not much of a newspa])er man ; that is, he furnishes very little 
news, and although he ought to give me the cream of the news, he 
divides it up evenly with Frank Hosford of the Free Prcsx and the 
other Detroit papers. I do not like that pretty much, but I can't 
lielp myself, for Burrows says he has to placate and keep in with 
the other correspondents. Of course I get left by it, l)ut that is to 
be expected." 



37 

I repeated to Mr. Fry my suggestion that after long years of in- 
timac}' with Mr. Burrows, and full knoAvledge of bis tricky, deceit- 
ful and hypocritical character, that he should take precaution to 
show in the future that Burrows had not only inspired, but required 
him to send this dispatch. He promised to do so and we parted. 
On the day following the publication of the dispatch Mr. Dingley 
wired both Senator Stockbridge and Burrows calling the attention 
of each to the dispatch, and asking of each if the dispatch 
was authorized by either, and if its allegations Avere true so far as 
each knew. Senator Stockbridge promptly replied denying the 
truth of the statements contained in the dispatch so far as they re- 
ferred to him. Mr. Burrows remained silent. Later in the day he 
received another dispatch from editor Dingley of the most peremp- 
tory character demanding an immediate statement from him as to his 
responsibility for the article in question, and also a denial of the 
truth of its allegations. Still Mr. Burrows remained silent. On the 
following morning I met Senator Stockbridge, who told me that 
Barrows had pat his foot in it very badly by attacking Dingley as 
he had, adding : 

"I think it will cost Smith Fry his job as correspondent on the 
Trihme. Dingley wired me and I promptly answered. He has 
wired Barrows three times, but he has not yet responded, but will 
this morning. He showed me the dispatch, which I said would not 
satisfy Dingley, and I do not know what he will do." 

Subsequently I learned that Mr. Dingley, on receiving Mr. Bur- 
rows' dispatch, wired in reply that it was not satisfactory, and de- 
manded a full and immediate retraction of the charges contained in 
the Trihune dispatch within fifteen minutes after receiving his 
(Dingley's) dispatch. Representative BurroAvs thereupon sent a 
dispatch denying absolutely all knowledge, connection, or complicity 
with the said Tribune dispatch of January 20. I was much inter- 
ested in the affair, because it illustrated perfectlv the hypocritical, 
sneaking, and deceitful character of Julius Ca?sar Barrows, of which 
I had long been aware. I had had many conversations with Sen- 
ator Stockbridge in regard to Representative Burrows, in which he 
had told me that Burrows was constantly and secretly traducing 
and slandering him, in spite of the fact that he had always contrib- 
uted freely to Burrows' Congressional campaigns ; that he had 
loaned him money or indorsed his notes to carry on certain spec- 
ulations, and yet he Avas constantly being treated by BurroAvs with 
the vilest treachery. He frequently referred to BurroAvs' treachery 
in the matter of the " Brule and Ontonagon grant," and said : 

" I made a mistake in helping this 'rascal' to get back into Con- 
gress. He did nothing toAvards passing the bill through the House, 
which any other Republican member from this district could have 
done, and I kneAv the real fight Avould be in the Senate, as it proved, 
but Burrows [begged and pleaded like a Avhipped hound to be for- 
given and restored to Congress, and of course I yielded and helped 
him back. In spite of the fact that he and his Avife have been my 
guests for dinner every Sunday, as you know, he is constantl}' 



38 

traduciug me and I have this straight from two members of the 
House, who despise him as heartily as you do. But what can you 
do with such a creature, who has no moral sensibilities or feeling 
whatever? You might as well appeal to a log as to his sense of 
morality or integrity on political affairs. He would cut the throat 
of his brother or of any human being, no matter what he had done 
for him, if the brother or any other person stood in his way 
politicall}'. I hear that he is speculating in stocks, and wdien I 
told him that if it were so I would not loan him another dollar or 
indorse his notes, he replied that he was not such a fool as to 
dabble in stocks, and yet I have learned positively that he has been 
stock -jobbing for five or six years." 

Another conversation of this character, which will be noted in 
another and more appropriate place, will be given. A few days 
after this conversation, Mr. Fry came to me with a copy of the 
Detroit Tribune and called my attention to an editorial paragraph, 
in which the Tribune apologized to Mr. Dingley for Fry's dispatch, 
saying that it did Mr. Dingley an injustice, was inaccurate, and 
should not have been published, and expressed profound regret for 
its pul:)licatiou. When that session terminated, Mr. Fry's connec- 
tion with the paper, as its Washington correspondent, ceased. 
Last fall, while home, I inquired of Mr. Dingley in regard to this 
matter, and told him what I knew, having told him in December, 
1894, that he ought not to hold Mr. Fry responsible for the dispatch 
in question, as it was inspired and dictated by Mr. Burrows him- 
self and that Mr. Fry felt that if he did not send it that he would 
lose his place as clerk and the friendship of Mr. Burrows, who M'as 
very bitter against him (Dingley). Subsequently Mr. Dingley 
stated to me that Mr. Olds had told him that the statement I had 
made as to Burrows' inspiring and dictating this dispatch was 
absolutely correct of his own personal knowledge, and that he was 
amazed that Burrows should try to put tiie responsibility upon Fry, 
who was an unwilling agent in the matter. 

In September last, Mr. Dingley told me that Representative Bur- 
rows had told him that he had a letter frorii Mr. Fry vindicating 
him (Burrows) from all knowledge or participation in the said dis- 
patch, saying that it was his own (Fry's) production derived partly 
from statements made by Mr. Burrows, ifec. Mr. Burrows repeatedly 
promised Mr. Dingley to show him the alleged letter from Mr. Fry, 
but up to date has never done so. This is sim])ly another illustra- 
tion or exhibit in support of my charge that Julias C;i'sar Burrows 
is a hypocrite, a demagogue, anil a liar. 

[For Washington dispiitch to Detroit Tribune referred to, see 
next page.] 



39 

[The Tribune's Washington Dispatch.'] 

BONUS FOR PRINTING NEWS. 



WHAT A MICHIGAN EDITOR DEMANDS OF CONGRESSMEN. 



SUBSCRIBEES CLAMOR FOR SPEECHES WHILE HE WAITS FOR MONEY. 



AN EXPLANATION THAT WILL BE A REVELATION TO HIS READERS. 



Washington, Special Telegram, Jan. 20. — There is a mau in the 
newspaper business within two hundred miles of Detroit who is 
engaged in a small piece of business which deserves public mention. 
One of the most distinguished members of the House of Represent- 
atives has his home in the town where the newspaper is published. 
He has given his influence and standing for many years to aid the 
newspaper, by holding the Republican organization solidly in its 
support. He has seen to it that good business, particularly during 
campaigns, was sent to the newspaper, and good prices paid for 
work. 

There is a United States Senator whose home is in the town 
where the newspaper referred to is published. He has contributed 
largely to the hnaucial success of the paper ; and yet, when he 
wanted a small article inserted in the paper on one occasion, and 
stated that he wanted to pay for it, a bill for $20 was sent to him, 
which he paid, although at exorbitant advertising rates the matter 
was really worth but $1 or $2. 

During the debate on the repeal of the Sherman silver law, the 
eminent Congressman delivered a speech which was quoted all over 
the country and highly commended. The editor of his home paper 
barely alluded to the speech editorially. He, however, published a 
portion of the speech, and then sent a bill to the Congressman for 
having printed a speech which every one of his subscribers wanted 
to read, and which they were entitled to get in their home paper. 

The distinguished member of Congress recently delivered a speech 
on the tariff, which was published in full in New York and Chicago 
papers. From one column to four columns of the speech \vere 
published in all of the newspapers of the North which are of the 
same political faith, belonging to the same part}^ and proud of the 
Congressman for his strength and power to defend the cause and 
the principles which he champions. 

Wanted a Consideration. 

Every leading newspaper commented upon the speech. The 
National Committee of the party to which the Congressional leader 
belongs has ordered 100,000 copies of the speech to be used 
as a campaign document. Eminent men from every State in the 



40 

Uuioij have written the eiuinent Congressman, congratulating him 
upon his speech and thanking him for his splendid party services. 

The newspapers in his home town did not print the speech ; did 
not print a column of it ; did not print half a column, and made only 
a scant allusion, editorially, to the fact that a speech has been 
delivered. 

The patrons of the newspaper were clamoring for the speed), be- 
cause the Congressman is their townsman ; they know him ; they 
admire him ; they kno^v him for one of the foremost orators of this 
day; they besought the editor to print the speech. He declined to 
do so. But, he wrote to the member of Congress soliciting the busi- 
ness of printing the speech, for a consideration. 

Of course, newspapers must live, and they are entitled to support 
from their party leaders. The paper in question has always received 
proper suppart and kind treatment. Under the circumstances, 
whatever name may be applied to the editor's conduct, the people 
are entitled to know existing conditions. The people of the Con- 
gressional district are entitled to know the situation. The Trihnne 
circulates in the district in question. 

S. I). FRY. 

The foregoing dispatch should be read in the light of the fact that 
Julius Cu'sar Burrows never paid a dollar even as a subscriber to 
the J'eleyrap/i unless lately ; that for over a quarter of a centuiT he 
has been a political mendicant at its door ; that the bulk of his cam- 
paign expenses— never heavy — have been paid by his father-in-law ; 
brother-in-law ; the late Senator Stockbridge ; by" protected interests" 
from whom he has solicited contributions, by the Pennsylvania E.R., 
and for the last four j'ears by the Blodgetts and lobbyist " Nat " Mc- 
Kay. From 1878 to date, with the exception of the years 1894 and 
1898 when he was a candidate for election to the Senate, Julius 
Ca>sar Burrows has never " campaigned " the State of Michigan. 
This is a matter of record, and has been the subject of comment 
among those who have kept close watch of his political movements. 
In all the other campaign years he has been in the emplo}' of the 
Republican National and Congressional Campaign Committees at 
i^50.()0 per speech — frequently making two a day, thus receiving 
$100.00 per day — and all his travelling expenses. This is known 
to all the old Republican campaign committee managers, who have 
spoken of it with disgust and contempt. It is an " open secret " 
here, and has been for years, that in the campaign of 1890 — an 
off year — the " Columbian Orator " was employed by the chairman 
of the Repul)li('an Congressional Committee at the usual rates ; that 
he was working througli New York eastward Avhen he concluded to 
" raise the limit ; " that he wired and wrote the chairman that his 
own district was in danger and that unless he at once returned to 
and looked after it personally he would be defeated, and asking to 
have substitutes announced for his dates ; that the chairman wired it 
was impossible to let him ofl' as substitutes could not then be got, 
and asking if financial Mssistance would not ])nll him through ; that 



41 

the " Orator " replied that possibly it would, but it would be too bi^ 
a figure, as he aloue could save his district ; that he was then asked 
to uame a figure, and responded that $5,000.00 would save him ; that 
that sum was sent him ; that he continued his tour and kept his dates, 
afterwards putting in some work in his district, which was carefully 
looked after by Senator Stock bridge and others, the chairman of 
Burrows' Congressional Committee reporting an expenditure 
by him of some $800.00, of which the Senator subscribed 
$500.00, while the " Orator " never " chipped in " a dollar for his 
own election. And yet this professional politician has the brazen 
effrontery to prate of his " long, arduous and tireless service for the 
Eepublican party " as a reason for his being kept perpetually in 
office, and the Burrows " lictors " (and lick-spittles) from the Detroit 
Journal — ow^ned by ex-Senator Palmer, a two-dollar lumberman, 
and the beneficiary of Burrows' treachery to his State as a conferee 
on that item, of thousands of dollars — Collector Rich and the fed- 
eral ofiice-holders down to the smallest fish, including that import- 
ant person committee clerk Rose and back to the Journal again in 
the person of " Chief Gusher " General " Yusef," all take up the 
glad refrain of " Burrows Forever ; To Hell with the Pope, and 
Damn Pingree ! " 

A member of the Republican National Committee for nearly 20 
years told me recently that once with his associates he made a care- 
ful computation of the money the two committees — National and 
State — had paid Burrows for his " campaign thunder " and expenses 
and they figured out — not including the $5,000.00 out of which 
Burrows " buncoed " the Congressional Committee in 1890 — that 
the " Columbian Orator " had cost them since the campaign of 
1878 — leaving out his two personal campaigns of Michigan for 
Senator in 1894 and 1898— about |24,000. He penciled out these 
figures, which I still have in his handwriting, viz : 

" Julius Ca?sar Burrows 

To Republican National and Congressional Campaign 
Committees, Dr. 

" To money received for campaign speeches and personal 
expenses since 1878 to 1898, inclusive (excepting years 
1894 and 1898) ".....$24,000" 

Note. — Burrows averaged over 50 speeches in each campaign, 
often speaking in the September and October States. 

" 50 speeches at $50 each for each campaign $2,500 

9 campaigns at $2,500 each 22,500 

Personal expenses of ' Columbian Orator' 2,500 

Total $27,500 

Deduct for payments by local committees 3,500 

Balance $24,000 " 



42 

" Burrows is a good stumper," said the national committeeman, 
" for small cities, large villages, and the ' rural districts.' He is a 
dead failure in a large city or before an intelligent and educated 
audience. The first time I heard him, back in 1876, he gave me the 
'cramps' with his V)loody-shirt '3'awp' after Grant had said, 'Let 
us have peace.' Tilden was the Democratic candidate, was as 
' loyal ' as Burrows, and had repudiated all ' war claims,' which 
was Burrows' chief theme. And yet this blatant, bloody-shirt 
' spouter,' who knows nothing of finance, the currency, the tariff, 
labor and kindred questions, and absolutely nothing of our all- 
important foreign relations and policy, has been able to fool you 
Michiganders and keep constantly in office ! How does he do it ? " 

" He don't fool us — that is, but a few ' suckers,' " I answered, 
" but he has kept in office by hanging on to Senator Stockbridge — 
though constantly false and untrue to him — and since Stockbridge's 
death to the Blodgetts and lobbyist ' Nat ' McKa}-. This new legis- 
lature cannot be bought up like cattle as was a large part of the 
legislature of 1894, because the men so bought were largely the 
' scum ' which came in duiing the Republican flood of that year. 
That's the reason ! " 

As a matter of course, it will be said that this is hearsay and 
loose allegation, born of personal spite. Very well. Let any 
person who wants information on this point step into the office of 
Schuyler S. Olds, at Lansing, and ask him about it. He was elected 
secretary of the committee, but declined after a while to serve 
further for good reasons. I have his letter before me with much 
fuller particulars than I have given above. And then, while on the 
subject of the " Columbian Orator's " receiving $50 and expenses per 
speech, as heretofore stated, let me relate the following incident. 
On the Saturday night preceding the election of 1896, I was in the 
Cosmopolitan Club of Kalamazoo playing whist or hearts with a 
party consisting of the late Dr. Foster Pratt, of that city, Jacob K. 
Wagner, a leading citizen and wealthy capitalist, Hon. N. H. Stewart, 
a leading attorney, and either Mr. Sydney Faxon or some other 
gentleman. Mr. Wagner, who is a Democrat, jocularly remarked 
that the Democrats could not win because they " had no money to 
hire orators " ; that about two weeks previous he was in Grand 
Rapids and while in the waiting-room of the Morton House writing 
a letter, he heard the voice of Julius Cfosar Burrows behind him. 
The "Columbian Orator" was engaged in conversation with ap- 
parently a committee ap[)ointed to get him to speak in their city. 
The " Orator " plead that he must look after some private business 
affairs in that city and Kalamazoo ; that he was paying his own 
expenses ; that he was a poor man, etc. (same old lie,) and really 
they must let him oft" this time. Thereupon up spoke one of the 
trio and said that they a])pre('iato(l the Senator's situation, etc. ; that 
they expected to pay him for the speech and all his expenses and 
give him a big meeting, etc. " Very well," said the " Orator " in those 
deep chest tones which are the admiration of the "Burrows lictors " 
and almost throw " General Yusef " into tits — of ecstasy when he 



4:3 

hears them reverberating for miles in the vicinity of the " Orator," 
crippling cattle and destroying vegetation, which he describes in his 
despatches as " Burrows awakening the echoes " — " with that under- 
standing I will go." " What will be your terms, Senator ? " said the 
leading committeeman. The Senator toyed with a toothpick a 
moment and replied, " How does $100 strike yon ? " "All right," 
responded the committeeman, and they shook hands and parted. 
" I thought," said Mr. Wagner, " they were from Ionia." There was 
no secrecy imposed and it was an open " free-for-all" conversation 
which I took note of. Some " red-headed rooster " in Ionia got on 
his ear either at the request of the " Orator " or " Friday " Rose, 
and denied the story. Since then Mr. Wagner has told and written 
me that he was satisfied the party was from Lowell, and private 
investigation has satisfied me that was the town. No matter what 
the place was, the conversation occurred as stated and the 
" Columbian Orator " got $100 for " speaking his piece " at some 
city near Grand Rapids, while throughout the entire campaign 
the Blodgetts and lobbyist " Nat " McKay were paying all his cam- 
paign expenses. And yet this demagogue ranted about Colonel 
Brj'an "receiving subscriptions" by assessing the towns where 
he spoke in the same campaign ! " Oh Shame, where is thy 
blush ? " 



On the 29tli of September the Detroit Journal published a scur- 
rilous and lying letter written by William E. Curtis, the notorious 
Washington correspondent of the Chicago Record. Mr. Curtis had 
previously sent it to the Detroit News, the editor of which excluded 
the personal attacks upon me and printed the " meat " — what there 
was — of the letter. I was then eii route here, and on reaching 
Washington, made reply as hereinafter stated. After some delay, 
Editor Livingstone returned it to me with the absurd remark that 
my communication was declined with thanks. 

As Editor Baker of the News had declined to print Mr. Curtis' 
letter in full, on account of its personal attacks on me, he could not 
consistently print my " rejoinder," which I am willing to concede is 
decidedly personal in its allusion to Mr. Curtis. For that reason, 
and in order to bring out fully the vile treachery and assasin-like 
course of Julius Ciesar Burrows towards General Alger in the fall 
and winter of 1887 and winter and spring of 1888, I print it in 
this pamphlet. 

I will be only too happy to submit to any investigating committee 
of the Michigan legislature the names of twenty-five prominent citi- 
zens of Michigan — including Hon. Schuyler S. Olds, of Lansing,, 
who knows some additional facts — who know of their own personal 
knowledge of the truth of the statement I have made in this par- 
ticular regard. 



44 



y'o ///(' KiHtor of the Detroit Joitrndl : 

On the 3d iustaut at the Russell House iu Detroit — where I hivd 
just arrived from Kalamazoo — my attention was called to a publica- 
tion in your issue of tl)e 29th ultimo of a letter from William E. 
Curtis, the Washington correspondent of the Chicago liecord, con- 
cerning myself, and dated Washington, September 26th, the day after 
the arrival there of Senator Burrows from Detroit. I left Detroit 
that night, and, until now, by reason of illness and absence from the 
city, have been unable to make reply. 

Your editorial statement preceding it was a surprise to me, 
especially your characterization of Mr. Curtis as " the leading cor- 
respondent of Washington," and saying that " his standing among 
news]iaper men and statesmen is of the highest, and his reputation 
for veracity stands 'unimpeached." I will fully establish, before I 
am through with Mr. Curtis in this matter, that no other reputable 
paper iu tlie United States — except possibly the Chicago Record — 
and no correspondent in Washington of any standing or character 
will give Mr. Curtis the endorsement the Journal gave him. 

I have known Mr. Curtis for many years, and his attack upon me 
was a surprise. It was made the day following [Senator Burrows' 
arrival in Washington from Detroit, and the visit of the Senator to 
correspondent Curtis was announced by your Washington corre- 
s])Oudent. What the consideration was that Mr. Curtis received for 
his letter is known only to the Senator and himself. It was Avritteu 
at the request of ex-Senator Palmer and Senator Burrows, for the 
sole purpose of breaking down the publication I had made in the 
Detroit News of September 19th, that Mr. Palmer had obtained 
from the AVar Department the army record of General Alger for 
])ublicati()]i on the eve of the Kepublican National Convention at 
Chicago, on June 19, 1888, and also to break the force, if })ossible, 
of my statement that in December, 1887, Mr. Burrows gave me the 
substance of said record, which included the letters of Generals 
Custer, Merritt, and Torbert, and the indorsement of General 
Sheridan recommending the dismissal of General Alger from the 
army for repeated absence from his command without leave. I 
stated in the News publication that I refused to be a party to such 
a publication, or to circulate the story in any way among the Wash- 
ington corresjiondents, as Mr. Burrows requested. I also stated that 
following my said refusal to be a party to the attack which Senator 
Palmer and Representative Burrows contemplated on Gen(U-al Alger, 
Mr. Burrows read to me a statement which, if published, would have 
very grievously wounded General Alger's feelings ; that he asked 
mo to procure the publication in the social gossip of some New York 
or Southern jiaper of the article he read to me ; that he asked me 
to give it to Miss Austine Snead, formerly a correspondent for the 
Free Press, and then the Washington society correspondent of sev- 
eral prominent i)apers, with the request that she would publish so 
much of it as slie could, and that she would verbally state to the 
society leaders in Washington, with whom she was necessarily well 



45 

acquainted in her search for news, the facts contained in the paper 
Mr. Burrows read to me, with the view of preventing the appoint- 
ment of General Alger as Secretary of War, which, Mr. Burrows 
stated, was the goal of his ambition. Mr. Burrows added, " You 
may say to Miss Snead that if she will do this I will see that 
she gets one hundred dollars." I refused with some vehemence 
to be a party to this dirty work which Mr. Burrows proposed, 
and he then said, "All right, I will see her myself." Shortly after- 
ward Miss Snead called on me and stated that Mr. Burrows 
had called upon her and requested her to make public, both 
by letter and verbally to the society leaders in Washington, 
the contents of the paper which Mr. Burrows read to me. 
She stated to me the substance of the paper and of Mr. Burrows' 
argument to induce her to use the matter as he desired, saying 
that Mr. Burrows offered her one hundred dollars to procure its 
publication. Miss Snead was very indignant at the proposition 
made by Mr. Burrows, and requested him to leave and never again 
speak to her. This fact — which I did not state in the News publi- 
cation — is known to at least a dozen persons in Washington to whom 
Miss Snead stated the facts in December, 1887. 

Eeferring to that paragraph, Mr. Curtis, iu his letter of September 
26th, says : 

" FURTHERMOKE, THE MiSS SnEAD TO WHOM Mr. SmITH REFERS, DIED 
LONG BEFORE HIS ALLEGED INTERVIEW WITH SENATOR BURROAVS COULD 
HAVE TAKEN PLACE, AND THE LATTER WOULD NOT BE SO ABSURD AS TO 

ASK Mr. Smith to give a copy of General Alger's war record to a 

DEAD WOMAN." 

In reply to this false statement, I clip the following from the 
Washington Post of March 23, 1888, which I find on page 3 of that 
issue : 

Miss Snead's Death. 

" Miss Austine Snead, popularly known to newspaper readers 
AS ' Miss Grundy,' died somewhat suddenly at her residence, 1531 

1 street, N.W., YESTERDAY MORNING ABOUT TEN o'CLOCK. HeR ILLNESS, 
occasioned by PNEUMONIA, AVAS SHORT. ShE WAS NOT CONSIDERED 
DANGEROUSLY ILL BY HER PHYSICIAN, Dr. G. L. MaGRUDER, UNTIL 

Wednesday, and was out on Saturday last though quite unwell." 
Then follows a sketch of her life, character, and Avritiugs, the 
papers with which she was connected, etc. " At the time of her 
death," says the Post article, " she was connected with the Boston 
Courier, New York Jleratd, Louisville Co nrier- Journal, and llni'pers 
Bazaar. She avas buried in Oak Hill Cemetery, Georgetoavn, 
March 24, 1888." 

What new lie Mr. William Elleroy Curtis, the Washington corre- 
spondent of the Chicago Record, whose " standing among newspaper 
men and statesmen is of the highest," and whose " reputation for 
veracity stands unimpeached " — according to the Journal — will noio 
concoct to squeeze out of the lie above quoted from his letter of 
September 26, remains to be seen. I leave this conclusive evidence 



46 

of Mr. Cartis' deliberate falsehood to the candid and honest judg- 
ment of the editor, as well as readers of the Journal, without further 
comment. 

In the Weirs publication of September 19, I stated the object of 
Mr. Burrows' visit to me immediately after the convening of the first 
session of the Fiftieth Congress on December 5, 1887. I said that 
preceding the reading by Mr. Burrows of the papers above referred 
to, that gentleman said substantially as follows : " As you are aware, 
General Alger, at great expense, has been organizing Alger clubs 
throughout Michigan ; has been giving out flour and coal, boots and 
shoes, and other things to poor families — in which there were voters — 
and his purpose is to swamp all independent Republican action in 
Michigan for other candidates for the Presidency next j-ear. If, as 
Republicans all believe, we secure the next House of Representatives 
on the tarifi" issue, the principal candidate for Speaker from the 
East will be Reed, while the candidates from the West will be 
McKinley, Cannon, and myself. I have every reason to believe 
that the Western Republicans will unite on me, while I have reason 
to expect the solid Pennsylvania delegation, through the promises 
of Senators Quay and Cameron, which delegation, you remember, 
nominated General Keifer, Speaker in the Forty-seventh Congress. 
The onl}^ chance for me, therefore, is to break down General Alger. 
His purpose is to make a candidacy for President, and, failing to 
secure that, he will become a candidate for Secretary of War, and, 
in the event of his success, I shall be knocked out of the Speaker- 
ship." 

Mr. Burrows then read the papers above referred to — the first of 
which I still have — and we had the conversation stated. I replied, 
as stated in the News, that I did not believe he could make any 
headway with the story, as no Republican paper of prominence 
wonkl print it, as General Alger had been elected Governor of 
Michigan by the Republican party in 1884. To that statement Mr. 
Burrows replied that " Alger barely pulled through with so popular 
a candidate as Blaine running, and that Alger did not dare stand 
for re-election." Mr. Burrows was indignant about the corruption 
of Michigan caucuses and conventions by General Alger, and said 
tlie Republican party would come to grief by it. I also stated, in 
reply to repeated urging by Mr. Burrows, that I would not do what 
he wished without consnlting with my friend Governor Blair. I 
immediately wrote the Governor, stating the snbstance of the inter- 
view, and asking his advice. I have his ripply, under date of De- 
cember 13, 1887, advising me to have nothing whatever to do with 
tlje circulation of the story, saying that I knew very well how tricky 
and unreliable Captain Burrows was, and also that he " had been 
informed during the previous month that Senator Thomas W. Palmer 
had obtained Gcnicral Alger's record from the War Department and 
intended procuring its publication." 

I also stated in the News article that the publication was not 
made until June, 1888, on the eve of the National Convention at 
Chicago. It was published iu the New York Sun and destroyed 



47 

whatever chances General Alger had for securing the nomination 
for President. 

I am informed that ex-Senator Palmer has published an article in 
the JVews in which he states that he was not responsible for, and 
did not procure, any publication in the New York Siai in June, 
1888, concerning General Alger's army record. Mr. Palmer is quite 
right in denying the accuracy of the above paragraph. In common 
with the Washington correspondents and the general belief or 
opinion, I was under the impression that the Su?i publication Avas 
made in June, 1888. That was also the opinion of Mr. David Barry, 
the Washington correspondent of the New York Sun, a citizen of 
Michigan, born at Monroe, who personally searched with great care 
tlie files of the Sun from June Istto June25th — the day the Chicago 
convention adjourned — for the "Alger record," without success. I 
then looked the matter up and found that the first publication was 
made on February 11, 1892, when delegates were being selected to 
attend the Republican National Convention which met at Minneapolis 
on June 7, 1892. I can only explain the erroneous impression I 
had — which was and is the general impression — by reason of the 
fact that General Daffield — or Colonel Hecker — telegraphed to Rep- 
resentative O'Donnell, of the Jackson district, to procure without 
delay an official copy of General Alger's military record from start 
to finish, and send it immediately to General Duffield at the Grand 
Pacific Hotel, Ciiicago. General Duffield is now in Detroit, I be- 
lieve, and the Journal can very easily ascertain Avhether or not he 
sent the dispatch, or whether it was sent by Colonel Hecker. They 
had learned that the managers of Senator Sherman had a copy of 
General Alger's arni}^ record and that they had threatened its pub- 
lication unless the Alger managers " stopped tampering with South- 
ern and other delegates pledged to Mr. Sherman." It is immaterial 
who sent the dispatch, but ex-Representative O'Donnell posted with 
great haste to the AVar Department and obtained an official copy of 
General Alger's record, which he addressed to General Duffield at 
the Grand Pacific Hotel, Chicago, and sent it by Adams Express. 
Afterward he ascertained that he could gain twelve hours by send- 
ing it by special messenger to General Duffield. He accordingly 
withdrew the package from the express office and sent it by Mr. 
Chillian P. Conger — sou of the late ex-Senator Omar D. Conger — 
who told, with a great deal of disgust, his inability for several hours 
to reach General Duffield with the package which he was instructed 
by Mr. O'Donnell to deliver only to General Duffield. 

Why not inquire of General Duffield, who is a truthful man, as to 
the truth or falsity of this statement? 

Senator Sheimau's managers did not use the material they had 
procured from the War Department, and, consequently, no publica- 
tion was made by General Duffi«ld or Colonel Hecker of the papers 
they had procured from the War Department. I was the parlia- 
mentary secretary of that convention, and I knew of the existence of 
both copies, and know that leading members of the convention dis- 
cussed it ; that the managers of Senator Allison, ex-Senator Harri- 



48 

son, aud Mr. Depew opposed the publication of the paper procured 
by Mr. Sherman's managers, while the friends of Mr. Gresham 
urged its immediate publication in the Chicago Tribune. 

I referred incidentally in the Neios pul)lication to the fact that 
within three months I had been told h\ ]\[r. Curtis and Mr. Barry 
certain facts in regard to the Sun publication and said that " Curtis 
told me that Burrows had importuned him and others to print the 
story on Alger, which his paper declined to do." I should have 
added the paragraph — in order to make it perfectly clear — that the 
refusal of the Chicago Record to print the story was to make an 
initial publication, and the tiles of that paper will show that immedi- 
ately (ifter the publication in the Sun of February 11th, 1892, Mr. 
William Elleroy Curtis, its Washington correspondent — with the 
same ghoulish glee that he bitterly assailed and denounced Mr. 
Blaine, week after week and month after month, when he was a 
candidate for President, until Mr. Blaine silenced him with i)lace 
and patronage — attacked General Alger. In his letter of September 
26th, he sa3's : " My paper did not decline to print Secretary Alger's 
war record, but has published it over my signature several times." 
An examination of Curtis' dispatches will show that of all the per- 
sonal enemies who attacked Mr. Blaine and General Alger, none ex- 
ceeded Curtis in the bitterness — amounting almost to ferocity — with 
which he attacked them. The most villainous and infamous stories 
which were circulated about these gentlemen were eagerly snapped 
u]) by Mr. Curtis and sent to his paper, and it was not until Mr. 
Blaine promised Mr. Curtis an important place prior to the conven- 
tion of 1888 — when he expected but did not receive the nomination 
for President — that Mr. Curtis' attacks upon Mr. Blaine ceased. 
Mr. Curtis had the hardihood and effrontery to publicly and privately 
support Mr. Blaine's candidacy at that convention, and it is a fact well 
knoAvn in Washington that after Mr. Blaine became Secretary of 
State in General Harrison's administration, he rewarded Curtis by 
giving him place aud patronage, on which he has prospered to the 
extent of being worth, as is generally asserted, S150,000, whereas he 
came to Washington in 1870 as a "helper" in the Chicago Inter- 
Oceiin\s AVashington bureau, " poor as a church mouse," as the 
saying goes. Mr. Curtis has not ceased attacking General Alger, 
and because of the refusal of President McKiidey to appoint him as 
Chief of the Bureau of American llepublics, Mr. Curtis has covertly 
and slyly — like the newspaper assassin that he is — criticised the 
President's course. He lias for some time past been attacking 
Colonel Humphreys on General Miles' staff for his refusal to allow 
the item of $100,000 claimed by the Plant System for transi)ortatiou 
of troops, etc. For some years past the story has been current 
among Washington rejiorters and correspondents that Mr. Curtis 
has l)een the agent of Mr. Plant in his efforts to secure a subsidy 
for a steamsliii) line to South America, and I will give at the proper 
time the names of reliable correspondents to establish the truth of 
this assertion. 

It is well known that Secretary Gresham dismissed Curtis from the 



49 

positiou of Siiperiutendeut of the State Department exhibit at the 
Chicago exposition ; that he repeatedly stated to reliable corre- 
spondents here that he was never able to get a satisfactory settle- 
ment of Curtis' accounts, and that he ordered Curtis out of his office 
when the latter proposed to tell him some alleged "crooked" 
things that Secretary Blaine — for years his patron saint — had done. 

It is of record that Mr. Curtis in the Fifty-fourth Congress 
figured as a lobbyist and used his position as the correspondent of 
the Chicago Record to extort from Mr. Emile M. Blum, who was 
United States Commissioner General to the International Exposi- 
tion at Barcelona in 1889, a small sum of money in consideration of 
Curtis' using his influence with Mr. Cannon, of Illinois, Chairman 
of the House Committee on Appropriations, in securing the inser- 
tion in the sundry civil bill of an appropriation of $11,000 to Mr. 
Blum for his expenses and services in making said exposition a 
success. 

Mr. Dunuell, the Washington correspondent for many years of 
the New York Times — whose integrity will not be questioned by any 
man who knows him — published the facts in his dispatches in the 
Times of April 18th, 1895, which appear in the Times of the follow- 
ing day. In this dispatch Mr. Dunnell states that at the Chicago 
exposition Mr. Blum and Mr. Curtis first met ; that Blum was a 
" promoter " and Curtis was willing to be one ; that Blum and others 
were organizing " The International Manufacturers' Exposition 
Agency," and Curtis invested $650 in it ; that the cornpany did not 
succeed as was expected, but it did not prove a total failure, as Mr. 
Curtis got $418.16 as earnings or profits ; that the item appropri- 
ating $11,000 was inserted in the Senate as an amendment; that it 
went to conference, and that the House conferees, Messrs. Cannon, 
Sayers, of Texas, and O'Neil, of Massachusetts, would only agree to 
the allowance of about one-third of the claim ; that Mr. Curtis 
called upon Mr. Blum to pay up the difference ; that Mr. Blum, who 
did not obtain what he expected, did not pay up, and that Mr. Curtis 
then did a rash thing in writing the following letter : 

"Post Building, 
" Washington, D. C, April 12, 1895. 
" Mr. Emile M. Blum, 

" New York City. 
" Dear Sir : Before I leave for China, on the 20th instant, I want 
to give you one more chance to do the fair thing. I did exactly 
what I agreed to do, and expect you to do the same. I did not 
pledge you the support of Mr. Cannon, but I told you I would do 
the best I could with him, and if I had not gone to him your para- 
graph would have been stricken out of the bill. 

" You say that you will do the proper thing when you get the 
rest of your money, but unless you settle on this appropriation, as 
you agreed to do, I fear you will never get any more on that account, 
because when Mr. Cannon comes to Washington again I shall tell 



50 

him the whole story, and I do not think lie will be inclined to favor 
jou. 

" I was out $650 by the company. I received 1418.16, leaving a 
balance of $231.84, as I told you, which 3'ou agreed to make good. 
If you do not do so, everything is over between us. 
" Yours truly, 

" WILLIAM E. CURTIS." 

Mr. Dnnuell further states that Mr. Blum waited a few days, 
meanwhile taking legal advice, and sent the following reply to Mr. 
Curtis and copies to the House conferees, viz : 

"New York, April 17, 1895. 
" William E. Curtis, Esq., 

'■'■Correspondent Chicago Record, 

" WasJi'mqton, D. C. 

" Dear Sir: I have your letter of April 12th, in which you ask 
me to pay you a sum of money for your services in having influenced 
Congressman Cannon, of Illinois, to support the amendment to the 
Sundry Civil Bill, authorizing the Treasury Department to reimburse 
me on account of expenses incurred as Commissioner General of the 
Ignited States to the International Exposition at Barcelona in 1889. 
You refer to a recent conversation between us, as to which, on 
reflection, of course, you will agree that you were wholly mistaken. 

" I do not propose to submit to this demand. The payment of 
money to a journalist for influencing a menil)er of Congress to sup- 
port a measure for the appropriation of |)ublic funds does not im- 
press me as a particularly creditable transaction, and the fact that that 
journalist's paper happens to be a leading metropolitan daily, having 
a large circulation in the district represented by the Congressman 
claimed to have been so influenced, does not lend character to the 
deal. It would be dishonest for you to accept this money, and it 
would be dishonest for me to pay it to you. 

" In view of your threat to influence Mr. Cannon to prevent the 
next Congress from appropriating the balance justly due me, on 
account of the Barcelona exjiosition, I have sent him, as well as the 
other members of the A]ii)ropriations Committee who have been 
re-elected to the Forty-fourth Congress, a copy of your letter and of 
this reply. 

"Very truly yours, 

"EMILE M. BLUM." 

I leave out of consichu'ation all the stories of the small " pick- 
ings " which Mr. Curtis has had during his career as a correspond- 
ent, mentioning only the story that for putting the name of a cer- 
tain brand of champagne on the menu cards during the extensive 
junket of the Pan-American Congress, — which was handled by Mr. 
('urtis, — ]Mr. Curtis received the sum of $300 from the agents who 
were handling that brand of chamj)agne in the American nuirket. 

Mr. Curtis dictated to the Washington correspondent of the Neios, 



51 

after having been shown the paragraph in my article referring to 
him (Curtis 1 the following : 

" No ; Palmer never had any connection with the Sun publication 
of Alger's army record to my hiotvledge. To the best of my recol- 
lection Harry Smith offered that story. Palmer hates Alger, but he 
is too lazy and too good-natured to do anything like that. Why, he 
wouldn't even hurt a tiy." 

In the paragraph in which Mr. Curtis says, " To the best of my 
recollection Harry Smith offered that story," he merely intended to 
be jocular, and start what, in the Prairie States, is popularly known 
as a " back-fire." 

As but few Michigan people know an3'thiug about Mr. Curtis, 
save through the Journal publication of September 29th last, I will 
sa}' that that statement is a deliberate lie, and without the slightest 
foundation to support it, and when Mr. Curtis — still in a jocular 
vein — says, " the last time I talked with Mr. Smith about Michigan 
politics he was eulogizing Senator Burrows and lambasting what he 
called the ' Pingree-Pack gang,' " he forgets that in a few paragraphs 
above he stated that he had not seen me for more than three months, 
when, as stated, I met him near the Riggs National Bank with a 
friend of mine, in whose presence he stated that Mr. Palmer pro- 
cured the record of General Alger from the War Department ; that 
he importuned him to send it to his paper, and that his paper de- 
clined to print it until it had been started elsewhere. There is no 
correspondent of prominence here, and certainly not a member of 
the Michigan delegation in Congress for the last four j'ears, who 
does not know that I have assailed and denounced Senator Burrows 
" in season," and possibly out of season. The statement, therefore, 
that the last time he saw me I was "eulogizing Senator Burrows 
and lambasting the ' Pingree-Pack gang ' " is not only a deliberate 
but an infamous lie, which only such a scurvy cur as William El- 
leroy Curtis would publish. 

When he states that I have revolved around Senator Burrows 
long enough ; that Senator Burrows exercised a good deal of pa- 
tience and influence in trying to keep me in office, and could not do 
any more for me, etc., he not only betrays the inspiration of Senator 
Burrows, who has made this false statement repeatedly — and which 
I shall show at the proper time to be absolutely without founda- 
tion — but also shows his animus and eagerness to break me down 
for the purpose of defending his " chum "- — as he familiarly calls 
liim — " Tom " Palmer. 

It is known to scores of correspondents here, as well as to many 
members of Congress, that Mr. Curtis has repeatedh^ sneered at and 
sharply criticised Mr. Burrows. It is also known that he has pri- 
vately denounced him as a demagogue, a weakling, and a dishonest 
man ; that he has repeatedly spoken of Mr. Burrows in the most 
contemptuous terms, and rejoiced over the statement I made that 
his term of office would certainly end on March 4, 1899. To a 
Michigan member he said : " Why don't you send ' Peppermint ' 



52 

Todd ill place of Burrows ? You could theu depend on knowing 
hoAv Todd stood and would vote on any given question." 

I referred to Mr. David 8. Barry, the Washington correspondent 
of the New York Si/n, in the same paragraph I referred to the 
statement of Mr. Curtis. Wliy does not the Jovrnal get a denial 
from Mr. Barry as to tlie truth of my statement ? 

In another paragraph Mr. Curtis says that he did not tell me 
" the facts regarding the 8(tn publication, because I never knew 
them, and I do not believe Mr. Barry did, for he was not connected 
with the New York Sun at the time." In a previous paragrapli Mr. 
Curtis contradicts this statement, and says that his paper printed 
Secretary Alger's war record over his signature several times. If 
Mr. Curtis had taken the trouble to refer to page 175 of the Con- 
gressional Directory for the second session of the Fifty-first Con- 
gress, published on January 15, 1891, he would have found, under 
the head of " Members of the Press," the following line : " Barry, 
David S., New Y^ork Snn and Detroit Journal, othce 1417 G street, 
N.W.," while the Sun publication of General Alger's record was not 
made until a year later, viz: Febniary 11, 1892, while Mr. Barry 
was in full charge of the Sun and Detroit Jo}irnal bureaus. 

This is only another nail in the coffin whicli I am constructing 
for Mr. William Elleroy Curtis, whom the Journal vouches for as a 
" man of the highest standing and whose reputation for veracity 
stands unimpeached." 

As illustrating Curtis' cunning and venality, a prominent Washing- 
ton corres})oudent relates the stor}^ of how Curtis was brought to 
grief en route to Washington after the Ilepublican National Conven- 
tion which met in Chicago on June 3rd and adjourned on June 6th, 
1884, after the nomination of Mr. Blaine. Curtis was vigorously 
" belching " for Arthur, with the hope of securing a " soft snap " in 
the State Department. He abused ]31aine in his usual coarse and 
ruffianly manner and was " called down " one day by a " broncho- 
buster " friend of Mr. Blaine from the far West, who notified Curtis 
that if he repeated any more of his abuse of Mr. Blaine he would 
smash his face. The ahacrity with which Mr. Curtis stopped his 
" yawp " about Mr. Blaine was amusing to the " boys." Immedi- 
ately after the nomination of Mr. Blaine, Mr. Curtis, who had 
taken charge of the literary bureau in President Arthur's behalf, 
gathered up with great care and pains all the telegrams which had 
been sent from the White House and elsewhere in President 
Artliur's interest, with a view of utilizing them in the future. Many 
of these dis])atches, the correspomlent stated, gave pledges asked 
for, and if published would have been of tlie most highly sensational 
character and greatly embarrassed President Arthur as well as the 
senders t)f these telegrams. Mr. Curtis saw his oj)portunity to iise 
tlicsc (lis]);itches as a leverage to ingratiate himself into Mr. 
Blaine's favor. "The King is dead! Long live the King! " 

Mr. Curtis set out from Chicago for AVashington with all speed, 
liaving tak(ui the precaution to write and wire Mr. Blaine that lie 
liad important matters to submit to liim and that he desired here- 



53 

after to be his friend. It was not long after Mr. Curtis escaped 
from the Arthur headquarters with hundreds of these telegrams that 
the fact was discovered that they were in his possession and that he 
had left for Washington. He was repeatedly wired on the train in 
respect to the telegrams, but made no response. 

Imagine Mr. Curtis' surprise when he reached Washington to find 
that the extra grip in which he had packed these dispatches, 
letters and other convention material for future use, was missing. 
He had the check, but the R. R. Company did not have the grip, 
and the correspondent relates with great gusto how a gentleman, 
who Mr. Curtis subsequently discovered was a United States secret 
service detective, tapped him on the shoulder and notified him that 
he was wanted at a certain office without delay. But why delay 
the dt^nouement ? Mr. Curtis was convinced that he had reached a 
place at last in his career where it was desirable to keep his mouth 
shut, — at least briefly, — and he succeeded admirably until the end 
of Mr. Arthur's administration on March 4th, 1885. 

This and other equally dishonest and unworthy tricks by this 
dirty cur are narrated on all sides. I have occupied prominent 
positions in the House, Senate, and Treasury during most of Mr. 
Curtis' career here, which commenced as an assistant correspondent 
of the Inter-Ocean during the Forty-fourth Congress (1876), and if 
the record of my life and work can be " whistled down the wind " 
by this newspaper Fagin, who, without his connection with a 
respectable but misguided newspaper, would have no standing 
whatever in Washington, then I have lived in vain. 

This letter is necessarily lengthy, but it does not give one-tenth 
of the slimy record of this newspaper assassin of the character and 
reputation of honest men. I believe I have a right to a full and 
fair hearing, particularly by reason of this editorial indorsement 
given Mr. Curtis. I have been a citizen of the State of Michigan 
since July, 18G1. One year later I enlisted as a private in the 26th 
regiment of Michigan infantry, and served until discharged for 
physical disability and by special order of President Lincoln ; was 
appointed to a clerkship in the Ordnance Bureau and was assigned 
to a confidential clerkship with Mr. Charles A. Dana, then Assistant 
Secretary of War. I cast my first vote for President Lincoln in 
1864, and have never missed a Presidential or State election since. 
I have not always voted to suit Mr. Burrows and his "pie-eating" 
friend Brewer, but I have voted always as my conscience dic- 
tated, as I always expect to do. I was in 1870 and 1871 a half 
owner and editor of the Kalamazoo Telegraph ; was secretary of 
the Republican State Central Committee in the campaign of 1870, 
and received the unanimous vote of thanks of that committee for my 
work, as well as the thanks of the successful candidates for Con- 
gress, especially from Mr. Conger and Mr. Waldron, who wrote that 
my earnest and zealous work had saved their elections ; and I have 
their letters to establish this statement. In the same year I was 
also appointed special United States marshal for both districts of 
Michigan to supervise the collection of social statistics, including 



54 

debt, taxatiou, pauperisin, crime, libraries, etc., etc. For my work 
in that respect I received the thanks of the Seci'etary of the Interior 
aud General Francis A. Walker, Superintendent of the Census, and 
also a warm letter from Governor Baldwin, as well as the unanimous 
editorial indorsements of the leading papers of Michigan for my 
work in so full}' collecting the information above referred to, which 
was missing in numerous other States. I have held important posi- 
tions in the Treasury Department, the last being Assistant Register, 
during which time I was Acting Register for over a year ; and held 
for fourteen years the important office of Journal Clerk of the 
House of Representatives, from which 1 was removed by Demo- 
cratic clerks for political reasons onl}', I have been a frequent 
contributor to the columns of Detroit papers — including the Journal 
— and now I am a special clerk of the Committee on Ways and 
Means, employed for the purpose of collecting and compiling the 
legislative history of all the leading American tariff acts. I will 
cheerfully put the record of my life, and mj' character, reputation, 
and standing in the country as against that of this hired Hessian. 
I do not suppose that anything this professional liar, William 
Elleroy Curtis, may say or write will aiiect in the slightest degree 
those who know me; but the Journal article has circulated through- 
out Michigan among men who do not know me and has been copied 
in a Kalamazoo paper. I therefore ask as a right the publication 
of this statement, length}' as it necessarily is, in order that I may 
be vindicated from the wanton and false attacks of this hireling 
William E. Curtis. 

In the Nev'ti publication I stated that Hon. Schuyler S. Olds, of 
Lansing, was fully aware of the desire and efitbrts of Representative 
Julius Caesar Burrows in the winter and spring of 1887-8 to secure 
the publication of General Alger's army record ; that Mr. Olds — 
with the aid of Senator Stockbridge and others — finally succeeded 
in dissuading Mr. Burrows from procuring its publication. Mr. Olds 
resides at Lansing; the Jour mil has a correspondent there, and it 
can easily ascertain the truth or falsehood of my statement. And 
then there is Secretary Alger ! Why not ask him what he knows 
about its truth or falsity ? Mr. Curtis says that " Palmer hates Al- 
ger !" Why ? Because Mr. Palmer kept General Alger out of Har- 
rison's Cabinet as Secretary of War, and General Alger reciprocated 
by keeping Mr. Palmer out of Harrison's Cabinet as Secretary of 
Agriculture! And yet the servile Mr. Curtis says, " Why, Palmer 
wouldn't iiurt a tiy '." and finally, why does not the Journal ask Sen- 
ator Burrows as to the truth or falsity of my statement as to the in- 
terview in December, 1887, when he read to me the papers described 
and asked me to procure their publication or the dissemination of 
their contents '? 

Why did he not immediately following its publication in the News 
deny its truth and denounce it as a falsehood? Why does he seek 
aid and comfort at the hands of a venal correspt)ndent, who has 
always spoken of him with contempt, and also printed slurs and 
attacks upon him ? The answer is very eas}', and it is because he 



55 

dare uot deuy the truth of my statements. He knows that many 
people, members and ex-members of Congress, know they are true, 
and, above all, he knows full well that Secretary Alger and Schuyler 
S. Olds know my statement to be true. 

Why did he not deny the truth of certain statements of mine 
printed in the News more than a year ago in answer to the " screech" 
of Henry M. Rose, the clerk of Senator Burrows' Committee on Re- 
vision of the Laws, which never meets, because it has never had any 
business referred to it? The answer is very easy, for he did not 
dare make a personal denial, for T had only stated facts mostly 
shown by public records. Instead of personally denying their truth, 
he dragged Mr. Mark S. Brewer, of Pontiac, the chief of the Repub- 
lican " pie-hunters and pie-eaters," and s]iecially known as " Old- 
Man-Afraid-He-Wont-Get-His-Share-Of-Pie," to answer my letter, 
and that person — to curry favor with Burrows, as he was then seek- 
ing a Government "job" — maundered through two columns to show 
that I had no business to interfere in tlie contest for Senator, as I 
was living in Washington, though he knew that I was a citizen of 
Michigan with a farm in Kalamazoo county, and Jiad never missed 
voting at a Presidential or State election since 1864, and also because 
I was " au ingrate to Mr. Burrows," and a lot of other similar "slop." 
All I ask is the fair play at the hands of the Journal which it con- 
cedes is the right of ever}' citizen who claiuis to have been defamed 
or injured by a publication in its columns. 

HENRY H. SMITH. 

Washington, D. C, October 25, 1898. 



THE WHISKEY RING INVESTIGATION. 



PROPOSED BY REPRESENTATIVE BURROWS IN THE 
FIFTY-SECOND CONGRESS. 



Burrows Abandons His Resolution After Affecting the 
Market Several Points. 



A STOCKJOBBING SPECULATION IN WHICH BURROWS 
IS SAID TO HAVE BEEN INTERESTED. 



He Offers to Let the Newspaper Boys in On the "Ground 

Floor." 



The second session of the Fifty-second Congress convened, after 
the holiday recess, on January 4, 1893. 1 was then Acting Register 
of the Treasury, and had been for several months, owing to the 



56 

illness and absence of General Rosecrans, then iu California. Durinc; 
the preceding session Representative Julius Ca'sar Burrows, on his 
way to the Capitol, was iu the habit of stopping at ray otHce nearly 
every morning to consult me in regard to parliamentary and legislative 
questions and proceedings. As Mr. Mark Brewer, of Pontiac, other- 
wise known as " Man-x\fraid-He-Won't-Get-His-Share-Of-Pie," and 
other Burrows " lickspittles " have charged me with being au " iu- 
grate " to Mr. Burrows, and have recited many things that Mr. Bur- 
rows has done for me, I will put in evidence at this point the follow- 
ing extracts from a letter as showing some of the im]iortant and 
valuable services which Julius Caesar Burrows wanted me to render 
Ji'rni : 

" House of Repeesentatiyes, U. S., 

Kalamazoo, Mich., iVov. 17///, 1891. 
My Dear Hahhy : 

' You're another ! ' I never said Fassett could carry New York, and 
if I did I ' lied ' ! I suspect it was Tom Piatt that defeated him. The 
people generally are getting tired of ' bosses,' and will some tine 
morning take them on their horns and throw them ' over the garden 
wall.' All right — that will suit rae. 

* -X- -X- -X- * -K- «• * 

But I write more especially to say that I want you to come to the 
' Elsmere ' this winter. If your family go awa}', you might as well 
stop there as anywhere else, and it will be so handy for consultations. 
Please do locate there. Tell Mrs. Rines for me to fix you just as 
you desire and charge it to rae. You 7mcst corae and help rae. I 
' need you every hour.' Write again soon. 
Your friend, 

J. C. BURROWS." 

Just after the reassembling of that Congress after the holiday 
recess of 1892 3, Mr. Burrows stopjied at my office one morning 
and asked for a confidential conversation. I was in ray own room, 
and we adjourned to the room of the Register, which I had not occu- 
pied. Mr. Burrows then told me that the matter of the enormity of 
the Whiskey Tiust had been brought to his attention by a gentle- 
n)an entirely familiar with the subject, who had given him some 
facts, together with a resolution, which he thought of submitting to 
the House, looking to the investigation of said trust. He then sub- 
stantially said this : 

"I don't know that this will amount to much this session, for the 
time is short, but it will at least arouse public sentiment and per- 
sonally will do me gi'eat good among th(^ temperance people iu Mich- 
igan. Besides that, there is a legitimate chance, in ray judgraent, to 
make several honest pennies out of it. The introduction of this 
resolution will necessarily knock the Whiskey Trust stock down 
several points, and it would not be a bad idea for us to sell such 
stock as we can handle. 7'A/.v /tv sfr/c/./i/ ro?ip'</ctitl<i/, and you raustu't 
bieathe a word of it even to voui' wife." 



57 

I laughed and said : " I have no donbt the introduction of such 
a resolution would depreciate whiskey stock and that money could 
be made by selling, but I have not the money, and unless you can 
help me out I do not see how I am to get any benetit out of it." To 
that he .replied : " Don't worry about that. The gentleman who has 
brought this matter to my attention will take care of us." He then 
said he wanted to look into tlie matter more thoroughly, and desired 
me to come to his house either that or the next night, and talk it 
over. I called at his house that night and again went over the mat- 
ter with him. 

I there met a Mr. Abraham, the person hereinafter referred to, 
and another person, introduced as Mr. Simmons, although I became 
satisfied before I left that that was not his true name. I afterwards 
met him at Chamberlin's with ex-Eepresentative Phil Thomson, and 
found that he was a Louisville whiskey man, whose name has escaped 
me. The matter was talked over fully, and I left these persons 
closeted Avith Mr. Burrows, who was " out " to all callers. A day 
or two afterward, Mr. Burrows called at my ofKce, and said he wanted 
me to " fix up " his " whiskey resolution." I read the papers he 
handed me, parts of which were in his own handwriting and the rest 
typewritten. I read it over and dictated to my stenographer a sub- 
stitute. I asked Mr. Burrow^s if I should not cut down the pream- 
ble, and he replied : " No ; it's a good stump speech." The copy was 
made, handed to Mr. Burrows, and I retained and still have the 
original. I paid no further attention to the matter, although Mr. 
Burrows said to me the next day, " I am waiting for the proper time 
to put in that resolution. It will be a good thing for us both." 

On January 13, 1893, Mr. Burrows introduced the resolution, 
which was not read in full, but appears at the end of the day's pro- 
ceeding as " a resolution to investigate the Whiskey Trust," which 
was referred to the Committee on Rules, of which he was a member. 
It was substantially as I drew it — a preamble and resolution — the pre- 
amble reciting that " the newspapers charge that spirits, high wines 
and alcohol are used as beverages by the use of adulterants ; that the 
trust was in a conspiracy with the distillers to that end ; that the 
adulteration is eiiected by the use of poisonous drugs, of which fact 
the retailers and consumers are in ignorance ; that the spirit of the 
rectifier's law is thus violated ; that the United States revenues are 
thus defrauded by the diminution of importations ; that the rectifiers 
are obliged to consume only the product of the trust under heavy 
penalties ; that the contracts are in restraint of commerce between 
the States; the resolution being as follows: 

"Therefore resolved, that a select committee of five members of 
the House be appointed to fully investigate and report upon the 
subject, and especially what persons are connected with the trust." 

On January 28 Mr. McMillin, from the Committee on Rules, re- 
ported the following substitute for the Burrows resolution, viz : 

'^Resolved, That the resolution of Mr. Burrows, respecting the 
Whiskey Trust, be, and the same is, hereby referred to the Commit- 
tee on the Judiciary, and the same committee is hereby authorized 



58 

and empowered to investigate the charges contained in said resohi- 
tion and report to the House thereon by bill or otherwise. Said 
committee is also authorized and empowered to investigate what, if 
any, other trusts or combinations in restraint of trade exist in the 
United States or have been fostered by Congressional legislation 
whicli controls markets or raises prices, and what, if any, additional 
legislation is necessar}- to remedy the evils; that said committee 
have power to send for persons, and to administer oaths, the ex- 
penses of this investigation to be paid out of the contingent fund of 
the House," 

There was no debate whatever on the proposition, and on March 
1, two days before Congress adjourned, Mr. Bynum, of Indiana, 
from the Judiciary Committee, submitted a long report. The report 
recites that it was instructed "to inquire into the character and 
operations of the Distilling and Cattle Feeding Company of the 
State of Illinois, denominated the whiske}' trust, and other trusts or 
combinations in restraint of trade that may exist within the United 
States." The report was made by a sub-committee consisting of 
Mr. Bynum, of Indiana, Mr. Stockdale, of Mississippi, Mr. Boatuer, 
of Louisiana, Mr. Buchanan, of New Jersey, and Mr. Powers, of 
Vermont, Messrs. Buchanan and Powers being Bepublicans. The 
report was an elaborate one and largelv technical. It included ex- 
pert testimony, and in the concluding paragraph appears the follow- 
ing : 

" It is therefore evident that none of the methods employed by 
the Distilling and Cattle Feeding Company, either in the methods 
employed in controlling the production or disposition of their 
products, are in violation of the Liws of the United States. 

" The question as to Avhether Congress can provide any remedy 
against the combinations of those engaged in the same business so 
as to prevent competition with each other in the open market is 
very doubtful. 

"The only authority conferred upon Congress which can ])ossil)ly 
be invoked is ' to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among 
the States.' It is clearly settled that the production or manufacture 
of that which may become a subject of interstate commerce and 
ultimately pass into protected trade is not commerce, nor can man- 
ufactories of any sort be instruments of commerce within the mean- 
ing of the Constitution." 

The report gave further definition, following a decision of the Su- 
preme Court, of what constituted interstate commerce. The report 
stated that it was in evidence before the committee that the Distill- 
ing and ('attle Feeding Company of Illinois produced about 95 per 
cent, of the alcohol consumed in the United States. This product 
was not onl}' used in manufactures, the arts and sciences, but was 
the chief solvent used in the preparation of most if not all remedies 
used by physicians in the treatment of the sick. This company was 
able upon tlu; mere report — started by the introduction of the Bur- 
rows resolution — that the internal-revenue tax might be increased 
by Congress to raise the price '25 cents per gallon. 

The report also showed the stock-jobbing character of the resolu- 



59 

tion, by stating that one Lewis Abraham — to whom I was introduced 
by Mr. Burrows at his room at the Elsmere— was a lawyer in the 
city of Washington well versed in the tariff and internal-revenue 
laws. The committee say : 

" Possessing considerable knowledge of the deleterious qualities 
of the oils and essences used in compounding whiskeys, he testified 
that some of them were poisonous. Upon inquiry the committee 
ascertained that he was the same attorney who appeared before the 
Finance Committee as the representative of the manufacturers of 
these oils and essences, and made an argument in favor of prohib- 
itory duties on such articles upon the ground that they were poison- 
ous and were used only in the adulteration of liquors. This plea 
for the protection of the American people against the importation 
of poisonous adulterants no doubt had great weight." 

The committee indorsed the recommendation of the Acting Com- 
missioner of Internal Revenue as to marking the packages and 
goods of this company so that customers would know exactly what 
they were purchasing, and concluded by saying that time was not 
sufficient in which to undertake the investigation of other alleged 
combinations or trusts — none of which were pointed out b}' Mr. 
Burrows — on account of the very short time remaining of the ses- 
sion. The committee concluded their report by saying that the 
recommendation as to the Distilling and Cattle Feeding Company 
would prove equally efficacious if applied to the products of other 
trusts, and it recommended that in the revision of tariff rates the 
very lowest duties consistent with necessary revenue be fixed upon 
all articles which have or may become the subjects of combinations. 

The report was unanimous with one exception, Mr. Ray, of New 
York, who put in a brief criticism of a portion of it. Messrs. 
Buchanan, of New Jersey, and Broderick, of Kansas, put in a ten- 
line remark that they did not concur " in so much of the report as 
refers to and denounces the effect of tariff legislation." 

The investigation was an expensive one, costing several thousand 
dollars and ending in smoke. Mr. Burrows, however, had accom- 
plished his purpose. Immediately following the presentation of his 
resolution the price of whiskey went down several points, and Mr. 
Burrows, with several other members of Congress and persons cog- 
nizant of the resolution, sold a large number of shares of the stock 
of this company, realizing thereby a handsome profit, according to 
the amount of shares sold and again buying at the lowest notch and 
making another profit when whiskey resumed its normal value. 

From the leading Washington stock-brokers firm I have obtained 
the highest and lowest prices on the day preceding the introduction 
of Mr. Burrows' resolution and for four days following, viz : 

High. L<yuj. 

Thursday, January 12, 1893 58^ 60^ 

Friday, January 13, 1893 58 60| 

Saturday, January 14, 1893 52f 53 

Monday, January 16, 1893 53^ 57i 

Tuesday, Januarv 17, 1893 56^ 58^ 

Wednesday, January 18, 1893 57f 58^ 



60 

Mr. Burrows' resolution acconiplislied its purpose of knockiup; 
dowu tlio stock 8 points, on which he and his associates realized 
haudsorael}', and then on the following day when it reached 52f 
they bought heavily, thus " catching the coon coining and 
gwine." It was one of the rankest and rottenest stock-jobhing 
performances of this kind I ever saw, and I have seen many in my 
30 years' connection with Congress. Tlie Washington correspond- 
ents of the leading newspapers of the country never trusted Bur- 
rows and one of them — quoted elsewhere by the JVews' Wash- 
ington correspondent (Mr. Miller) — stated that he had " never had 
any confidence in Mr. Burrows since." And there are others! 

In order to bother the "Columbian Orator" — whose close-tisted 
and penurious habits and character are well known — I spoke to 
him shortly afterwards about my share of the profits growing out of 
the " whiske3'-riug investigation " resolution. He made the excuse 
that he Avas "tied up in another speculation," but would "see me 
soon." I frequently, as a joke, called on him for my share, but it 
was always the " same old lie." So distrusted was Mr. Burrows 
that many to whom he confided his scheme refused to invest. 

Lest Mr. Burrows and " Friday " Rose make answer that this is 
merely " one of Harry Smith's lies," I will narrate the following in- 
cident : On Thursday evening, September 15 last, Avhile walking up 
loth street, in this city, with Mr. Charles Roman, of the New York 
Wo7i(7, I was halted at the Biggs House by the veteran correspon- 
dent, William B. Shaw, who is familiarly called "Nestor Shaw," hav- 
ing been a W^ishiugton correspondent before the civil war. A group 
of gentlemen were sitting on the corner of G and 15th streets chat- 
ting, among them being Mr. Walter E. Adams, Washington corre- 
spondent for many years of the Boston Herald, Mr. J. H. McBlair, 
photographer of the Treasury Department, and other gentlemen 
well known in Washington. As Shaw had told me that Burrows 
offered to " let him in on the ground floor" in the matter of his 
whiskey-ring investigation resolution stock-jobbing scheme, but that 
he knew Burrows was tricky and dishonest, he did not go in, which 
he regretted as the " boys cleaned up a good many thousand dollars 
on the scheme," I brought up the sul)ject and Shaw told the whole 
story in its minutest details, giving the names of Burrows' asso(^iates, 
and also narrating other schemes in which Burrows had been inter- 
ested, among otiiers, the sugar-stock speculations of 1894. " It was 
a lucky thing," said Shaw, " for many members of the House that 
John DeAVitt Warner, of New York, and a New Jersey member 
claimed tlnnr privileges as members of the House and refused to 
testify, as otherwise some 50 or 60 Representatives (Burrows in- 
cluded) would have been caught, unless they had lied out of the 
matter as many Senators did. Burrows is still dabbling in stocks, 
and occasionally gets caught, and then he ' squeals like a stuck 
pig,' and wants somebody to helj) hiiu out on some new deal." 

I took j)articular pains to get a list of the names of the eleven 
gentlemen composing the group and I will be only too happy to 
place them at tlie disposal of any committee of investigation which 



61 

the Michigan legislature may appoint at the request of Senator 
Julius Ciesar Burrows. 

In further illustration of Mr. Burrows' stock-jobbiug habits and 
proclivities, I will mention the fact that he induced several Wash- 
ington gentlemen to invest in the Centennial Mine in the Upper 
Peninsula. Upon learning that the mine was not likel}' to pan out 
as he had expected, he made a personal inspection of the mine, or 
caused it to be made, and privately sold out his own stock at what 
it cost him, leaving in the lurch his Washington friends — one an 
ex-member of Congress from Michigan — who were stuck to the tune 
of several thousand dollars. I will also state the fact that, during 
the pendency of the Diugley bill, and while the conference com- 
mittee were considering the disagreements between the two houses, 
and the sugar schedule was up, Mr. Burrows Avas, according to 
reliable reports from persons who had superior means of knowing 
the facts, buying and selling sugar stocks, as the situation seemed 
to require. I was told by one of the leading stock-brokers in 
Washington, who had got on the wrong side of the market, that he 
obtained his information directly from a Senate conferee, saying, 
"You know the man very well, or at least used to.'' As I have only 
known Mr. Burrows by sight since November 15, 1894, I took it for 
granted, as I was justified in doing, that the Senate conferee to 
whom he referred was the Hon. Julius CjTesar Burrows, of Kala- 
mazoo, who, for the last fifteen years to my personal knowledge, 
has been a regular and steady buyer or seller, as the case might 
favor, of stocks whose value depended upon legislation by Congress. 



BUKROWS' FRIEND LOBBYIST "NAT" McKAY PUT OFF 
SENATE FLOOR IN CLOSING HOURS OF FORTY- 
FIRST CONGRESS BY " OLD ZACK " CHANDLER. 



" Old Zack " Denounced the Iron-Clad Claims as Rotten Jobs 
AND McKay as a " Fresh " Lobbyist. 



In the closing hours of the Forty-first Congress Senator Nye, of 
Nevada, persistently attempted to get through the Senate a bill for the 
relief of the so-called " Iron-clad Contractors " improperly reported 
by him from the Committee on Naval Affairs, and was as often de- 
feated by the objections of Senators Edmunds, Morrill, Trumbull, 
Chandler, and others. Just before daylight he made a sly attempt 
to sneak the bill through the Senate when less than a dozen Sena- 
tors were on the floor. But "Old Zack" was on guard and objected. 
Julius Ciesar Burrows' friend " Nat " McKay sneaked in from the 



62 

lobby and crept along to Chandler's desk and begged him to with- 
draw his objection, saying that some of his (Chandler's) friends M'ere 
interested in the bill, which was an omnibus bill. " No," thundered 
" Old Zack," in tones which roused the sleepers on the floor and in 
the galleries. " No friend of mine is interested in this d — d job. 
Get out of here or I will have you thrown out." McKay retreated 
in great haste, and from that liour until Mr. Chandler's death never 
hesitated to curse and denounce him. McKay told, with great gusto, 
once of his drinking a glass of wine to this toast, proposed by him- 
self, when the news came of Senator Chandler's sudden death in 
Chicago : " Here's hoping that ' Old Zack ' Chandler will roast in 
hell until the crack of doom." 

It's a long way from Zachariah Chandler to Julius Ciesar Burrows, 
and for that matter a good long distance down ! 



TEN-MILLION-DOLLAR CLAIM BILL PENDING IN 
CONFERENCE. 



Lobbyist " Nat " McKay and His Attorney Interested to Extent 
OF Nearly One Million Dollars. — Additional Claim of $G1,000 
FOR Kepresentatives of John Roach.— McKay's Fees Fifit Per 
Cent, in all Cases. 

Why "Nat' Wants Burrows Re-elected to the Senate. 



There is now pending in conference House bill 4936, for the 
allowance of certain claims for stores and supplies, reported by 
Court of Claims under provisions of act ap])roved March 3, 1883, 
known as the Bowman act, and for other pui])oses. This bill, as it 
originally passed the House, was limited strictly to claims iis stated 
in the title of the act. The Senate Committee on Claims procured 
the insertion of an item in the deficiency bill for the first session of 
the present Congress authorizing the {^reparation of a schedule of 
all claims which had passed the Senate for insertion in what is 
known as an omnibus bill. The list was made and rt^ported to the 
Senate, and the great bulk of these claims are doubtless just and 
proper. Among them, however, are many claims which should go 
out, or at least I)e recommitted to the committee for further exami- 
nation. The Committee on C-laims reported a substitute, in which 
was included tlu( ]>()wman-act claims as passed the Houst^ and other 
items as follows : 

In section 2, under head of sui)plemental Bowman and rent cases, 
were included many items heretofore rejected by Congress. 



63 

Under bead of miscellaneous Court of Claims findings there ap- 
pears in section 3 an award to Charles F. Choteau, as survivor of 
Chotean, Harrison, and Valle, of St. Louis, etc., for extra cost of 
construction of iron-clad steam batter}' Etlah in 1864, the sum of 
$174,445, aAvarded by the Court of Claims. This case once passed 
the Coiirt of Claims, was appealed to the Supreme Court and re- 
versed, and by this appropriation, it is stated. Congress proposes to 
reverse the decision of the Supreme Court. It is stated that McKay, 
who has all of what are known as the iron-clad cases, is attorney for 
this, with a fee of fifty per cent., though he is not a lawyer. 

Section 4 is added, embracing a long list of French spoliation 
claims. 

Section 5 embraces items " under contracts of the Navy Depart- 
ment" for construction of double-ender Otsego in 1862-3. 

Under head of " Selfridge Board Findings " are allowances as 
follows : 

To legal representatives of John Roach, $62,000, in excess of 
contract price, etc., for construction of double-ender Peoria ; to 
Portland Company, Maine, $80,800 for double-ender gunboats 
AgaAvan and Pontoosuc; to administrator of the estate of George 
W. Lawrence, $17,000 for material for work done on same vessels; 
to George W. Quintard, of New York, |85,000 for United States 
iron-clad Ondaga ; to Thomas F. Rowland, |82,000 for double- 
ender Mucoota. 

Lobbyist "Nat" McKay is attorney for these claims, with a fifty 
per cent, fee, though not a lawyer. 

Then comes section 6, with a long list of appropriations for 
churches and schools in the South. Then come a few items for 
State claims, to California, Oregon, and Nevada of $4,600,000 ; also 
a payment to Florida. 

Then comes section 8, miscellaneous claims, a sort of catch-all 
for odds and ends, including an item of $5,000 to Emile M. Blum, 
which correspondent William Elleroy Curtis tried to stop unless 
Blum would pa}' him (Curtis) a certain sum of money, as elsewhere 
stated. Then come Piute Indian claims; claims for refund of 
internal-revenue taxes on account of private dies ; Utah claims, 
Treasury settlements, Spanish- American Commission, together with 
a lot of miscellaneous claims which have passed one or the other 
house of Congress since the close of the Civil War. 

Many of these claims of wliich lol)byist "Nat" McKay is 
attorney, with a commission of fifty per cent., were reported by 
Julius Ca3sar Biirrows, from the Committee on Claims. It stands 
as a matter of course that all claiius reported by Burrows in which 
McKay is interestetl need re-examination, and there has been much 
scandal growing out of the Methodist Ciiureh claim, where an 
attorney got a fee of $100,000 out of $288,000, and the enormous 
fee of fifty per cent, received by McKay out of the Roach claims 
passed at the last session, so that it is feared that the entire bill will 
fail, thus doing great injustice to nine-tenths of the honest and 
meritorious claims embodied in this bill. All this scandal has been 



G4 

broui^lit b}- the shameful conduct of lobbyist "Nat" McKay, whose 
opeu aud unblushing corrupt contluct and practices have beeu a 
reproach upon Congress for some time past. This man McKay is 
constantly hanging about the corridors of committee rooms of both 
houses, calling out members whom he entertains as his guests, ask- 
ing them to look after this or that matter for him, and then openly 
boasts of his influence aud power to make his guests do his bidding. 
He has not only openly boasted of bribing Congressmen, but had 
the unblushing effrontery to state at one of his " banquets" that his 
l)ill passed through the Fifty-first Congress, though appropriating 
^115,000 by the judgment of the Court of Claims, reall}' netted him 
but $44,000, the rest being paid to get it reported aud passed 
through the House, where, he said, he paid every Democrat who 
voted f6r it but one, and that person w^as present. McKay further 
said, on the same occasion, that he had to pay a few Republican 
brethren their campaign expenses, as well as " giease the ways " of 
the bill through tlie Court of Claims and Navy Department. 

It is more than likely that there will be an investigation ordered 
by the Senate after it reassembles in January, and some very 
unsavory scandals are threatened which will put an extinguisher on 
lobbyist " Nat " McKay. 



LOBBYIST " NAT " McKAY ATTEMPTS TO BRIBE HON. 
WILLIAM D. KELLEY, OF PENNSYLVANIA, THE 
APOSTLE OF HIGH PROTECTION, AND IS EXPOSED 
ON THE FLOOR OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTA- 
TIVES IN 1880. 

Is Also Ejected From Judge Kelle\''s LodginCtS. — " Nat " Was 
Then a Demekara Sugar Lobbyist. 



On Tliursday, March 11, 1880 (2d sess. 4Gth Cong.), the Honora- 
ble William D. Kelley, of Pennsylvania, better known as " Pig-iron 
Kello}'," the great apostle and champion of the high protective 
policy, rose to a question of personal privilege in the House, aud 
had rv:\{\ a special dis])atch from Washington to the Ki)enin<i Bulle- 
tin of Philadelphia of the previous da}'. The dispatch stated that 
Judge Kelley " was on the war-path yesterday looking for somebody 
to wreak his vengeance upon, all in consequence of a paragraph in 
the liiiUetbi a few days ago, about a conversation between himself 
and a lobbyist by the name of 'Nat' McKay, on the subject of 
sugar." Th(! disjiatch went (jn to relate some details, mostly of an 
unimportant character, stating "that McKay went into the Ways 



65 

and Means Committee room and was poiinced upon by Judge 
Kelley," " who," said a member of the committee who witnessed 
the affair, " made things lively for McKay, and I certainl}^ thought 
he intended to attack him," saying, among other things, " that Kelley 
told McKay that he never wanted to talk with him again on the 
sugar or au}' other question." 

The dispatch was read in full, and a point of order was made by 
a Missouri member that it must first be decided that the subject was 
privileged. Thereupon the following debate occurred : 

" Mr. Kelley. Mr. Speaker, I want to state to this House that, 
at the end of nineteen years, I have been corruptly approached for 
the purpose of controlling my vote in the Committee on Ways and 
Meaus and the House. 

" The Speaker. That clearly comes within the scope of the rule. 

" Mr. Kelley. If that does not relate to the dignity and houor of 
the House and the purity of legislation, I do not know what does. 

" The Speaker. The Chair thinks it does. 

" Mr. Kelley. Mr. Speaker, I have been here too long to take 
note of criticisms upon my temper, my person, or my manners. 
But when one to whom I have given my confidence, to whom I am 
grateful for having rushed to my relief when struggling with a 
hemorrhage, which I believed was to produce instant death, becomes 
THE witness of HIS OWN INFAMY, I thus Seek the defense of publicity. 

" None of the sugar dealers of Philadelphia, whether it be S. & 
W. Welsh, the great importers, Field Brothers, the commission 
merchants, E. C. Knight & Co., Harrison & Havemeyer, B. H. 
Bartol & Sou. or any of the respectable — and some of them very 
distinguished — men engaged in any branch of the sugar business, 
complain tliat I have not answered their letters or given patient 
hearing to their suggestions. A dispatch has just been handed me 
by my colleague (Mr. Ward), received since I came upon the floor, 
from the Messrs. Field, asking him to confer with me and urging 
us to stand firm in the position we have maintained. 

" No such scene as is described in what has been read from the 
desk occurred in the committee-room in the presence of any mem- 
ber of that committee. Colonel Jones (the clerk) and I being there, 
Mr. McKay entered and I hastened to tell him that I would kick, 
AS I would a dog, the man that approached me with corrupt in- 
fluences SUCH as he was stimulating. The grocery trade and the 
sugar trade have been in the fullest and freest corresi)ondence with 
me since we considered the tariff" of 1870, when I was, as now, a 
member of the Committee on Ways and Means. This man McKay, 

AFTER furtively PUTTING BEFORE ME CORRUPT MOTIVES, NOT SO PLAINLY 
AS TO JUSTIFY ME IN STRIKING HIM, BUT DISTINCTLY ENOUGH FOR ME TO 
COMPREHEND HIM, DISCLOSED THE FACT THAT LARGE AND PROFITABLE 
CONTRACTS WITH HIM FOR RAILROADS AND FOR PUBLIC BUILDINGS, ALL OF 
WHICH WOULD GO INTO PHILADELPHIA AND MOST OF THEM INTO MY DIS- 
TRICT, DEPENDED UPON THE ADMISSION OF HIGH-GRADE DeMERARA SUGARS 

AT LOW RATES OF DUTY, my response to all of which was that I did 
not care about the trade of Demerara or those contracts. 



66 

" Thus repulsed he proceeded to seek the officers of the con- 
vention THAT LAST RENOMINATED ME, AND INDUCE THEM AND OTHER MEN 
OF LESS NOTE TO WRITE ME REPEATING HIS SUGGESTIONS. A small num- 
ber of such letters came from meu who can probably distiuguish 
sugar from salt by sight, but who probably require to taste them if 
they be of equal grain and whiteness ; men who are in no wise con- 
nected with the sugar trade except as their wives may buy at retail 
for the use of their families ; nor were they men engaged in the 

IRON TRADE ; THEY WERE MERE POLITICIANS ; YET THIS MAN ASKED THEM 
TO INSTRUCT ME TO VOTE ON THE SUGAR BILL IN A PARTICULAR WAY UNDER 
THE PENALTY OF POLITICAL PUNISHMENT. 

"And be3'ond this, sir, another member of the audacious Demerara 
and Cuban lobby having been seated at the table at which my col- 
leagues, Mr. O'Neill, Mr. Ward, and 1 habitually dine, and while 
conversation on general topics went on between us, obtruded him- 
self into it in order to tell me that 1 was acting in disregard of the 
sentiment of my people ; and when I repulsed him properly, made 
it fitting that I should say to him that I had always found myself 
able to take care of myself, and if he attempted in any way to exe- 
cute liis intimation he would find that though more than sixty years 
had passed over my head, I was still able to take care of myself. 
[Applause.] 

" Sir, permit me to say in conclusion, that I have no fault to 
find with the paper that published that dispatch, nor with the re- 
porter who sent it. I admit that my temper was raised to a tem- 
pestuous degree by the audacity of this man McKay, who knew tliat 
for years I had believed that he had probably saved my life. Yet 

I WOULD HAVE KEl'T HIS INFAMOUS SECRET HAD HE NOT THUS PROCLAIMED 

IT. I blame not the reporter or the paper for giving credence to a 
man who, for so many years, enjoyed my own confidence." 

McKay attempted to bring about a reconciliation with Judge Kel- 
ley, but that gentleman sternly refused to even s])eak with him, and 
when McKay brazenly attempted to enter Mr. Kelley's room on 1-lth 
street with a party of Philadelphia friends, he was ordered out by 
Judge Kelley. It is needless to say that the Demerara sugar " job " 
failed to become a law. 



Federal Office-Holding Interference. 



SENATOR WOLCOTT'S VIGOROUS SPEECH. 



On Wednesday, June 8, 1H92, the Tenth Ptepublicati National 
Convention was in session at Minneapolis. The subject before the 
convention was the report of the Committee on Credentials. Bitter 



67 

complaint had been made of the fact that hundreds of federal office- 
holders throughout the South and elsewhere were delegates to the 
convention and were active, as well as solid, in support of the re- 
nomination of Benjamin Harrison for President, whose election was 
predicted by the veteran Republican leaders to be impossible. 
Senator Wolcott, of Colorado, in a speech on a contested case from 
Kentucky, was aroused by taunts of the federal office-holding dele- 
gates, and said : 

" I hold in my hand, Mr. Chairman, a list of one hundred and 
thirty odd office-holders who are delegates to this convention, nine- 
tenths of whom live in States where there is a hopeless Democratic 
majority. The trouble in this committee as to these delegates 
comes not alone from these men, but it comes from a pressure of 
between two and three thousand Government office-holders, who 
swarm the corridors of the hotels and fill these galleries and haunt 
the delegates, who ought to be in Washington and elsewhere attend- 
ing to their respective offices. We who are Republicans from 
Republican States w^ould like to have a little voice in naming the 
candidate for the Presidency. Possibly these office-holders may 
name him, but I do not believe it. But we from Republican States 
do ask the office-holding contingent, who are bringing a solid South 
against us, to at least conduct their side of the case in common 
decency and common honor, so that we won't be ashamed to vote the 
ticket." (Prolonged applause and cheers.) 

The nomination of Benjamin Harrison was forced upon the 
Republican party by office-holding delegates from the " solid South," 
as will be shown by the statement that he received 15 votes from 
Alabama, 15 from Kentucky, 8 from Florida, 26 from Georgia, 22 
from Kentucky, 8 from Louisiana, 14 from Maryland, 13^ from 
Mississippi, 28 from Missouri, 17f from North Carolina, 13 from 
South Carolina, 17 from Tennessee, 22 from Texas, 9 from Virginia, 
12 from West Virgina, and 22 votes from the Territories, 259 in all, 
while Mr. Blaine received 182 J and Governor McKiuley 182, or 364, 
or 88 votes more than President Harrison, excluding votes from 
Democratic States. 

This matter is cited to show what results from packing a con- 
vention with federal office-holders, who owe their bread and butter 
primarily to the President and secondly to the Senators from their 
respective States. Under the present system of Senatorial courtesy 
no man can be appointed to an office of any importance in any State 
without the approval of the Senators from that State, and this is 
sometimes carried so far as to require the approval of the Demo- 
cratic Senators. If he be persona non grata to the Democratic 
Senators, the nominee is often rejected. If there be justification 
for the interference of federal office-holders in dictating to and 
running conventions, it might be a national convention ; but with 
what propriety can it be claimed by even the most bitter partisan 
of Julius Csesav Burrows that it is any part of the duty or function 
of a Michigan federal office-holder to interfere with or " run " the 
politics of the State, Congressional or county conventions, and 



68 

especially to dictate and control the nominations for the State 
legislature ? 

Collector John T. Kich was present at that convention, and we sat 
at the same table at a private house. We talked about this very 
subject, and he was as bitter and indignant as I, and he applauded 
the speech of Senator Wolcott to the echo. I Avas the parliament- 
ary secretary of that convention, though Acting Register of the 
Treasury. I had been requested by the National Committee to at- 
tend for the purpose of assisting the temporary and permanent 
chairman of the convention, and I did so ; l)nt I was as thoroughly 
disgusted as Senator Wolcott himself. There were two delegates 
from Tennessee and one from Georgia who were clerks in my office, 
and they were active in their canvass and support of the renomina- 
tion of President Harrison, though there was not the slightest hope 
of his receiving the electoral vote of either Tennessee or Georgia. 
When I remonstrated with them about it and urged them to vote for 
McKinle}', they said : " It would cost us our places, and that is the 
case in all the Southern States where federal office-holders are dele- 
gates." 

It is quite time that the people of Michigan commenced thinking 
about what federal office-holding interference with State, Congres- 
sional district, county and city conventions means, finally reaching 
up to the selection of members of the legislature itself, whose duty 
it is to elect United States Senators to whom this federal office-hold- 
ing crowd owe their " bread and butter." 



BURROWS' ATTEMPT TO BREAK INTO THE 
FORTY-SECOND CONGRESS. 



General William L. Stoughton, of Sturgis, was the Representative 
in this Congress from the Fourth Congressional District of Michigan, 
comprising the counties of Berrien, Cass, Kalamazoo, St. Joseph, 
ann Van Puren. He was a gallant and distinguished soldier during 
tli(! War of the Rebellion, as will a])pear by reference to tiie official 
volume com])iled bv Adjutant General Robertson, " Michigan in the 
War." 

General Stoughton was not willing to agree to the demands of 
some ambitious and unscrn|)ulous politicians in tlu; district, notably 
in tile vilhige of Kalamazoo, for certain offices, and they sought to 
compass his defeat. He had served with credit — if not distinction — 
during the first and second sessions of the Forty-tirst Congress, on 
the Committee on Military Affairs, and was fairly and properly 
entitled to a rcnomination under the well-established rule prevailing 
in the Republican party, of giving to its Governor, State officials, 



69 

and Eepresentatives in Congress a renomination, except where 
special conditions and reasons existed to prevent. 

Julius CfEsar Burrows went into the army in 1862, as captain in 

the 17th Michigan Infantry, and resigned in 1864, with a trifle 

over a year's service to his credit, having been home once on furlough 
during that period. When Captain Burrows was elected to Congress 
in 1872, and many members of his company and regiment who knew 
his army record were his constituents, he made no boast of it in 
his campaign, and in the biographical sketch furnished the compiler 
of the Congressional Record for the 43d Congress made no reference 
whatever to his army service. When he again entered Congress 
(46th), after being defeated for election to the 44th Congress by 
Allen Potter, and for renomination to the 45th Congress by Judge 
Keightley — whom he defeated for renomination for a second term — 
he again omitted all reference to his army record, and it was not 
until the 47th Congress that he ventured to insert in the Record the 
statement that "in 1862 (no date given) entered the Union army, in 
the 17th Michigan Infantry, and participated in (certain named) 
battles (?) "Returning from the army" (no date given) this fiery 
" bloody-shirt " orator says he " reswined, the practice of law." 
" Resumed " is good ! When I was editor and part owner of the 
Kalamazoo Telegraph, in 1870-1, it was a common rumor that 
Captain Burrows got ver}' badly scared one day, turned his company 
over to Lieutenant Logan, of Richland, made a break for the 
surgeon's tent, lost his way and was found after sundown by the 
guard searching for stragglers, under shelter of a rock with a severe 
case of " belly-ache." 

There are scores of old citizens of Kalamazoo who know of the 
story, and if it were worth while, I could hunt up a private in his 
company now living in Kalamazoo county and get the particulars, as 
he stated them publicly on the street. Perhaps this and his treat- 
ment of Private Alva White, of St. Joseph county, in 1865-'66, 
which was fully exposed by Nathaniel H. Stewart, a leading lawyer 
of Kalamazoo, and the local attorney of the Michigan Central R.R., 
which is briefly stated elsewhere, together with withholding $440 
per annum for over three years from the salary of Alfred Pew, of 
Grand Rapids, the messenger of his committee, to be used by Mr. 
Burrows' committee clerk, Henry M. Rose, in entertaining Michigan 
guests of Senator Burrows at the Senate restaurant, may have had 
something to do with this suppression of his " splendid military 
record," about which some lick-spittle members vaunted in the 
caucus of Jauuar}', 1895. (?) Some of these creatures will feel 
cheap when they read the truth about Burrows' " army record." If 
there had been anything to brag about, the " Columbian Orator " 
would have had it all in. When he broke into the Fortj'-ninth Con- 
gress, in 1884, he fixed up this brief sentence : " Was an officer in 
the Union army, 1862-1864," and let it go at that. That might 
mean that he went in January 1, 1862, and retired on account of dis- 
ability on December 31, 1864. When it is known that his command- 
ing officer wrote Governor Blair, saying that there was not the 



70 

slightest objectiou on his part to Captain Burrows' resignation, " as 
his etiicieucy as an officer in that regiment was ended," he probably 
knew the facts better than did the Lansing "lick-spittles" of Jan- 
uary, 1895, and when ex-Governor Blair said in a speech at Buttle 
Creek in September, 1872, that " Captain Burrows' fiery ' l)loody- 
shirt ' speeches were accounted for by the fact that Captain Burrows 
went into the army late and came out early, and probably did 
not know the war was over," he knew better about the " Orator's " 
record than did the aforesaid Lansing persons. In response 
to the request of Mr, AVoolnough to give Burrows' army record, 
Governor Blair answered : " No ; I am not here fighting chip- 
munks, but to talk about Horace Greeley." The last edition of 
the Record still contains the phrase, " Was an officer in the Union 
army, 1862-1864." No date of entry or exit. This perfectly illus- 
trates his character, and there are thousands of citizens of Michi- 
gan who really believe that Julius CsBsar Burrows has a " grand 
military record," as that eminent " gusher " of the Detroit Journal ^ 
Mr. " Yusef," has so often written. I have not much of an army 
career myself, but I will match it against that of Captain " Bobadil" 
Burrows. 

Among the aspirants for the position of Posmaster in Kalamazoo 
was Henry G. Gale, a prominent business man. General Stoughton 
refused to promise him the appointment of Postmaster either for 
himself or for a person he should name. He thereupon set about 
securing General Stoughton's defeat for renomination, and put for- 
ward Captain Julius Cnesar Burrows as his candidate against the 
General. An organization was perfected in Kalamazoo county, 
with ramifications in other counties of the district, the organ of 
Captain Burrows being the Paw Paw True Northerner, then edited 
by " Tom Ward." Charges were made in the True Northerner and 
circulated throughout the district that General Stoughton had sold 
offices for money and had offered to sell others, together with other 
charges affecting his personal and official integrity. The district 
was scoured by this combine and some headway was made against 
General Stoughton, who maintained a dignified, though indignant, 
silence. No charge affecting his personal or official integrity had 
ever before been made, or even whispered, and he scorned to notice 
these charges as well as an affidavit made by one R. C. Nash, who 
swore that General Stoughton had promised to appoint him to an 
office upon the payment of a certain sum of money. 

Tiie Kalamazoo Tele(/raj)h editorially charged that Julius Caesar 
Burrows and iiis friends, Messrs. Gale, Ward, Angier, and others, 
were the autiiors of or had inspired these charges and affidavits 
against General Stoughton, and in its issue of August 3, 1870, the 
Telegraph published a letter exposing the character of Nash, in 
wliich it was shown that Nash had served three years in the state 
prison, and was, in tlie language of the Superintendent of Police of 
Washington, D. C, " a scoundrel of the worst kind, unworthy of 
belief, and ready to resort to any means to obtain money," and that 
" he is one of the worst villains at large in the country." In uumer- 



71 

ous issues it charged Julius Caesar Burrows aud his friends, Gale 
and Nash, with attempting to " defame a valiant soldier," with em- 
ploying " such miscreants as Nash — ' a state's prison bird' — to com- 
pass their nefarious purposes." On the 17th day of August, 1870, 
the Telegraph published the following editorial appeal : 

"To the Republicans of Kalamazoo County : 

" A very shameful thing has been done by those who call them- 
selves Eepublicaus but wlio dishonor the name. We have a Kepre- 
sentative in Congress with whom the people are well pleased, 
because he is honorable and reliable as a politician and statesman, 
as he has already been as a soldier and an officer in the Federal 
army. But some men who wanted office did not get it at his hands, 
and they have vowed to ruin him. There is no just cause of com- 
plaint against Mr. Stoughton, and none has been preferred. The 
grievances are all private, and tlie affidavits that have been circu- 
lated are slanderous and false. They have been proved to be so, 
and yet they work on in this county, asking you to vote for Mr. 
Julius C. Burrows ! Some of them acknowledge that they don't care 
a fig for the young man Burrows, but anything to kill off Mr. 
Stoughton with. We are sorry to learn that Captain Burrows is at 
work in this matter just as busy as Ward, Angier and Gale, and he 
knows just as well as they do what they have accomplished by 
means of false affidavits, and by deceiving the people with false 
issues. This whole crusade has been the most shameful one that 
ever disgraced tlie Republican party. Indeed, one of the papers in 
their interest is in Democratic ownership, and several of the active 
runners here with Mr. Burrows are those who have twice thrown 
the election into the hands of the Democrats of Kalamazoo. Will 
the voters in the several townships turn out at the caucus, and send 
such delegates to the count}' convention as love truth, and political 
honesty, and will vote for the renomination of Mr. Stoughton ? Do 
not be careless, and let a few ambitious demagogues get the mastery 
of you. Save the honor of the Republican warrior." 

Dr. J. A. B. Stone was then the principal proprietor of the Tele- 
graph. On the 20th day of August, 1870, there was a gathering of 
the leading Republican citizens of Kalamazoo, called at the request 
of Hezekiah G. Wells, to take such action as might be deemed pro- 
per to defend General Stoughton from the malicious and untruthful 
charges concocted, printed and circulated by Captain Julius C. 
Burrows and his office-seeking friends. That meeting was held in the 
editorial sanctum of the Telegrajjh, and the following paper, mainly 
prepared by Gen. Dwight May and Dr. Stone, was finally agreed 
upon as representing the views and opinions of the gentlemen pres- 
ent. It was printed by Dr. Stone in the TelegrapKs job printing 
office, and widely circulated througli Kalamazoo county ; said cir- 
cular being as follows : 

''To the Republican voters of Kalamazoo County : 

" Gentlemen : Disappointed office-seekers and men of petty am- 
bition have undertaken to destroy your confidence in your gallant 



72 

Representative ia Congress, Gen. William L. Stoughton. In this 
they have been unscrupulous. They have forged affidavits to prove 
that he sold offices for money. They have circulated them privately, 
and read them to men at midnight, to prejudice them against Mr. 
Stoughton. They have done this when they knew there was no 
trutli in their libelous charges, and only to gratify their own petty 
malice. When these affidavits came to the light they were disap- 
proved and Mr. Stoughton vindicated. But the}' still pursue him, 
and pretend they have other things to expose, but do not tell us 
what. They can forge more of the same sort. 

" Among those who are active in this conspirac}' is Julius C. Bur- 
rows, of Kalamazoo. He wants to destroy Mr. Stoughton so that 
he can wear his shoes. He is after an office we do not think he de- 
serves. In 1868 Mr. Burrows wanted something besides eight dollars 
a day for lecturing in the last campaign, and begged for an office. 
In December, 1868, he was appointed Supervisor of Revenue, and 
told to come to Washington and get instructions. He did not go ; 
said he would not have the office, would not accept it ; told his 
friends so. In March, 1869, he went to Washington to get the 
office of District Attorney. Told those he went with ho would not 
accept the other office ; told the delegation in Washington so, but 
told them he came for the District Attorneyship. Mr. Stougiiton 
and others put matters in train for this ; that is, made application 
for him and he came home. But first he went and made this 

Affidavit. 

Treasury Department, 

Office of Internal Revenue, 
Washington, J/«rc'/< 11, 1869. 

U. S. Int. Rev. Office. 

To Julius C. Burrows, Dr. 
Supervisor. 
To salary from March 1st to 10th, inclusive, at $2,500 per 

year $69 44 

Tax 2 08 

867 36 
March 1. 1869, railroad faro from Kalamazoo to Washing- 
ton 28 80 

Sleeping car two nights at $1.50 3 00 

Meals on three days at $2.2;") 6 75 

Room rent from 4th to 11th of Marcii 15 00 

Meals 11 60 

$132 01 
Received payment, 

(Signed) JULIUS C. BURROWS. 



73 

DisTEicT OF Columbia, ) 

County of Was/ii?i^to7i, ) "" 

Sworn to and subscribed before me this lltli day of March, 1869. 

(Signed) T. J. GARDNER, 

J. P. 

I certify this to be a true cop v. 

(Signed) J. W. DOUGLASS, 

Acthig Coimri'r Internal Bevemie. 

" This matter leaked out. The Department divulged the contents 
of the affidavit, and it created an excitement. Some of the Michi- 
gan delegation took their names off the application, and Attorney- 
General E. Rockwood Hoar said : ' We don't want such a man for 
District Attorney.' Another man was appointed. 

"Do we want such a man in Congress? But some of his friends 
say he was ordered to Washington ! Yes, when he was appointed 
early in December, 1868. But lie did not accept and enter upon his 
office. In March, 1869, he went to Washington for another pur- 
pose, and while there made this affidavit and took the money. Was 
it right ? What services did he perform that he should thrust his 
hand into the United States Treasury ? 

" Republican voters, this is a conspiracy got up by soreheads and 
ambitious office-seekers to ruin Gen. Stoughton. It is a plot against 
the Republican party, and the Democrats are pleased with the move- 
ment. They are not likely to be pleased with anything which does 
not injure us. If Mr. Stoughton is not the choice of the party, Mr. 
BurroAvs has no chance of succeeding him. There are too many 
older and abler men who will not take money for services never ren- 
dered, and who would do honor to the place. But we have confi- 
dence in the people ; they have found Mr. Stoughton honest, able, 
and faithful, and will not disgrace the party by putting him aside 
for a self-nominafced candidate whom they owe nothing but advice 
to wait until he is called. 

"TRUE REPUBLICANS." 

Ten days later Captain Julius C. Burrows published a card re- 
pudiating Nash, and issued a circular letter defending his accept- 
ance of the $132.01, partly on the ground that the Department of 
Justice was willing to pay him that amount, and partly because he 
intended and really meant to do something for the money he had 
received. To this the TelegrapU responded, repeating and reiterat- 
ing its charges in no less than four different issues. In its issue of 
August 18, 1870, it editorially asserted that Captain Burrows had 
told one of its editors that he did not want the office of Supervisor ; 
that he Avould not have it ; " that there was not money enough in 
it for him, and it was no use to talk about it, etc. ; " and that Mr. 
Burrows went to Washington to get another office, to wit, that of 
District Attorney for the Western District of Michigan. In that 
editorial the Telegraph asserted that Captain Burrows was in " bad 



74 

compauy — in a band of the most vindictive and unscrupulous poli- 
ticians scraped together from the whole district." In the same 
issue, it again asserted that Captain Burrows had " circulated false 
charges and aflidavits against General Stoughton ; " that he " was 
still circulating them — getting up new ones every day," and it ap- 
pealed most earnestly to the Republicans of Kalamazoo county to 
defeat him for the nomination as representative. 

Those charges were made at the time when the circumstances 
and facts were fresh in the minds and knowledge of the leading 
Republicans of Kalamazoo county, as well as of the Fourth Con- 
gressional District. Tlie}' were never withdrawn by the TelegrapJi, 
or in any way modified. If the}' were true then, they remain true. 
If it was necessary then to defeat Julius Civsar Burrows to save the 
character and honor of General Stoughton and prevent an unfit man 
from getting to Congress from the Fourth Congressional District, is 
it not equally necessary now, when more serious charges affecting his 
integrity and honesty — political and personal — have been made that 
the election of Julius C. Burrows for a full term in the United States 
Senate as his own successor should be prevented ? It should be 
remembered that these charges were not gotten up by the political 
enemies of Captain Burrows toward the close of a campaign, simply 
to influence votes, but they were charges made by members of his 
own political faith and published editorially by the Kahunazoo 
Telegraphy then, as now, the leading Republican paper in western 
Michigan. 

Mr. Burrows was well aware of the unwritten law controlling all 
political parties that a representative in Congress, who served one 
term satisfactorily, was entitled to reuomination for a second term 
without a contest in his own party, unless he has misrepresented 
his district and State or misconducted himself in other regards. No 
representative from Michigan in any other district, who desired a 
renomination had the slightest contest. This fact and the existence 
of the second term rule referred to was brought to Mr. Burrows' 
attention by the late Judge Wells. The Judge labored earnesth' 
with him to convince Mr. Burrows that he was making a serious 
mistake ; that he was a young man and could well afford to wait and 
bide his time. To these appeals, as well as others, Mr. Burrows 
turned a deaf ear. " I have as good a right," said Mr. Burrows, " to 
make a contest for this nomination as Gen. Stoughton has to seek a 
renomination. Grave charges against him have been made by repu- 
table men and in the face and teeth of these charges he has no 
right to ask a vindication at the hands of the Republican conven- 
tion in this district until he has completely exonerated himself." 
To the reply of Judge "Wells that any scoundrel or state-prison bird 
could could get up charges against liim (Burrows) after he had had 
one term, Mr. Burrows replied, " No such charges could or ever 
would be brought against ine, and I insist that until Gen. Stougli- 
ton's skirts are cleared anv man has a right to make a contest against 
him." 

Mr. Burrows again sought the nomination for the Forty-fifth Con- 



75 

gress, but was defeated by Judge Keiglitley, of Van Buren couuty. 
Mr. Burrows pleaded in vain for a vindication. Mr. Potter bad de- 
clined to be a candidate for the Forty-fifth CoDgress, and Mr. Bur- 
rows believed he could be elected. The Republican leaders of the 
district, representing every county, gathered in conference before the 
convention, and unanimously decided that Mr. Burrows should not 
be noruinatecl, as Mr. Potter would again make the contest and de- 
feat him for the Forty-fifth Congress. 

As a result of that conference, Mr. Burrows was notified that if 
by any trickery or chicanery he procured the nomination, these men, 
their friends and followers, would again join iu the support of Mr. 
Potter. When Judge Keightley became a candidate for nomination 
to the Forty-sixth Congress, Mr. Burrows again announced his can- 
didacy ; and, having used the entire period since Judge Keightley 's 
first election in assailing and vilifying him, succeeded in undermin- 
ing Mr. Keightley and defeated him. That result was accomplished 
only by the vilest duplicity and the basest deception and trickery, 
and stands out in bold relief as one of the greatest scandals in the 
country and Republican contests iu that Congressional district. 



Record of Julius Caesar Burrows as to 

Bills introduced by him in both 

Houses of Congress, and 

action thereon. 



FoETY- Third Congress. 

First Session. One public bill for construction of bridge over the 
Detroit River. (Not acted on.) 

(A similar bill introduced by Senator McMillan in the 53rd Con- 
gress was opposed by Mr. Burrows at the instance of, and in the 
interest of, the Pennsylvania Railroad, which was his " backer " in 
his Senatorial contest of 1894-5. 

He introduced nine private bills, two of which became laws, and 



76 

reported four others from the Committee on Claims, which became 
laws. 

Second Session. He introduced two public and three private bills, 
of whicli one private bill became a law. Public bills are viz : 

H. R. 4269. Providing for the payment of certain expenses of 
holding United States Courts in the Territory of Utah. (No action.) 

H. R. 4270. Providing for the punishment of contempt. (No 
action.) 

Forty-Sixth Congress. 

First Session. No public bill introduced. Seven private bills. 
(Four for constituents.) 

Second Session. A bill (H. R. 2779) proposing an amendment to 
the Constitution prohibiting polygamy. (No action. Copied after 
other bills.) 

Third Session. Four private bills. (No action on any.) 

Forty-Seventh Congress. 

First Session. Five public bills, all copied from other bills intro- 
duced. None relating specially to Michigan. 

1. To amend law relating to advertising in District of 

Columbia. (Benefit of local papers.) 

2. To fix fees of Internal Revenue Collectors. (Copied.) 

3. Relative to damages for infringement of patents. 

(Copied.) 

4. Relating to polygamy. (Old bill.) 

5. To amend law relative to bounty. (Copied.) 

He introduced fifteen private bills, of which two became laws. 
(But seven of these bills were for constituents.) 
Second Session. Three private bills. (No action.) 

Forty-Eighth Congress. 

(Not a member. Defeated by George L. Yaple.) 

Forty-Ninth Congress. 

First Session. Seven public bills, all but two being copied from 
other bills introduced. Two relating to Michigan ; none became 
laws and but two acted on. 

1. To amend law relative to coatwise vessels. (Old bill.) 

2. To regulate gas works in the District of Columbia. (By 

re(piest of attorney.) 

3. Relative to transportation of foreign mails on American 
. steamships. (Copied. No action.) 

4. To erect a public building in Kalamazoo. (No action 

taken.) 

5. For surv(\v of wutor route to connect Detroit River with 

Lake Michigan. (Representative Geo. Willard's bill 

of 43d Congress. H. R. 4971. Lake Michigan ; for 

survey of route to connect with Detroit River. 
Reported.) 



77 

6. For relief of restored pensioners. (Claim agents' bill.) 

7. To regulate duty on wool. (Copied. No action.) 

He also introduced sixty-one private bills, three-fourths of which 
were at the instance of claim agents, the beneficiaries living outside 
of his district. 

Second Session. One public bill as to coastwise vessels. (Old 
bill.) 

Two private bills. (Not acted on.) 

Fiftieth Congress, 

First Session. Introduced ten public bills, all but three being 
copies of other bills introduced. One passed. 

1. To amend law relating to coasting vessels. (Introduced 

in previous Congress. No action.) 

2. Bureau of Public Documents. (Copied.) 

3. To pay one month's salary to discharged employes. (H. 

Res. 3. To pay one month's salary to discharged 
employes. Passed House, and referred to Senate 
Committee on Appropriations.) 

4. To print decisions of Interior Department. (Copied. 

H. Res. 101. To print decisions of Interior Depart- 
ment. Passed House and Senate, and became law.) 

5. To erect public building at Kalamazoo. (Substitute 

H. R. 7595 reported. Not passed.) 

6. To increase salaries of District judges. (Severens former 

partner beneficiary.) 

7. To increase efficiency of Boards of Surgeons. H. R. 

1549, to increase efficiency of Boards of Surgeons. 
Reported adversely. (Increased salaries.) 

8. To increase efficiency of Medical Bureau. (Increase of 

salaries.) H. R. 1548, to increase efficiency of 
Medical Bureau, reported and debated, but not passed. 
Both of above old bills. 

9. To classify pensions. (Copied.) 

10. To pension prisoners of war. (Copied.) 
He also introduced thirty-seven private bills, of which more than 

half were for people outside of his district, and but five became 

laws. 

Second Session. No public or private bill. 

Fifty-First Congress. 

First Session. Seven public bills, of which three were old bills 
previoush' introduced by him. Three were copied from other bills, 
and one was original, viz : 

1. Commission on progress of colored people. (Copied.) 

2. To refund import duties. H. R. 4730. To refund cer- 

tain import duties. Reported. (Claim agents' bill.) 

3. To erect a monument to Isabella, Queen of Spain. (By 

request of a lady.) 



78 

4. To improve Mississippi River. (Prepared for him.) 

5. To increase eftit-ieucy of nav}-. (Copied.) 

6. To increase efficiency of Medical Division of Pension 

Bureau. (Old.) 

7. To increase efficiency of Pension Surgeons. (Old.) 
No action bad on these bills. 

Mr. Burrows introduced sixty-eight private bills during this ses- 
sion, of which but twenty-three were for his constituents. The rest 
were for claim agents. Seven became laws. 

Second Session. He introduced two public bills, copied, and one 
private bill during this session, none of whicli Avere acted on. 

11. Res. 294. Parlimentary History of Congress. (Reported 

back, but not acted on.) 
H. R. 12574. To adjust postmasters' salaries. (Not acted 
on.) 

Fifty-Second Congkess. 

Second Session. Mr. Burrows introduced ten public bills in this 
session : 

1. Granting right to C. W. & M. R.R. Co. to load freight 

at St. Joseph. (No action.) 

2. To equalize by increasing Government salaries. (No 

action.) 

3. To refund import duties. (Old bill. H. R. 5166. To 

refund certain Import Duties. Reference changed 
from Committee on Ways and Means to Committee 
on Claims.) 

4. Improvement of Mississippi River. (Old bill. No 

action taken.) 

5. To limit number of Civil Engineers in Navy. (By 

request. No action.) 

6. To amend Section 10 of Sundry Civil Act of July 28, 

1866. (No action taken.) H. R. 5458. To amend 
Section 10 of Sundry Civil Bill. Reported back, but 
no action taken. 

7. To incor[)orate Washington and Benning Street R.R. 

Co., District of Columbia. (No action. Attorneys' 
bill.) 

8. To extend Columbia Railway. (Attorneys' bill. No 

action.) 

He also introduc^ed twenty-two private bills, of which number 
nine were from his district. (Only one became a law.) 

Second Session. Mr, Burrows introduced one public bill for a 
Washington attorney, viz : to close certain alleys in Washington, 
D. C. (No action.) 

Ho alst) introduced two private bills, (jnly one for a constituent — 
no action being taken on either. 

Fiftv-Thikd Congress. 

First Session. Extra session convened on August 7, 1898. Mr. 
Burrows introduced eight bills, four public and four private, viz: 



79 

1. To erect a public building at Battle Creek. (No action.) 

2. To amend act relative to Japanese indemnity bond. 

(Claim agents' bill. No action.) 

3. To furnish decisions of courts in patent cases. (Attor- 

neys' bill. No action.) 
H. E. 2695. To Improve St. Joseph Harbor, Michigan. 
H. R. 4578. To Improve St. Joseph Harbor, Michigan. 
H. E. 5165. To Improve South Haven Harbor, 
Michigan. 

4. Granting pensions to prisoners of war. (Old bill.) 
Of the four private bills but one was for a constituent. 

Second Session. In this session Mr. Burrows introduced two 
public bills, one relative to the Eastern Cherokee Indians in Georgia, 
and the other relative to forfeited railroad lands. (Both claim 
agents' bills, Michigan having no interest in either.) 

He also introduced twenty-three private bills, of which but nine 
were for the relief of his constituents, and but two became laws. 

Third Session. Mr. Burrows was elected to the Senate in Jan- 
uary, 1895, and took his seat January 23d. 

He introduced four public bills, as follows : 

1. Donating condemned cannon to Grand Rapids Soldiers' 

Home. (No action.) 

2. To regulate navigation on the Great Lakes. (No action. 

Introduced b}' request.) 

3. To punish shooting at railway trains. (By request of 

Penn. R. R. No action.) 

4. For additional Circuit Judge in Sixth Judicial Circuit. 

(No action.) 

Fifty-Fourth Congress. 

1. In this session Senator Burrows introduced nineteen public 
and fifty-four private bills, most of which were introduced by re- 
quest, the private bills being principally at the request of claim 
agents. The public bills are as follows : 

1. To print agricultural bulletins. Mr. Burrows knew so 

little of the law that he made this measure a joint 
resolution, while the law required it should be in the 
form of a concurrent resolution. 

2. Cherokee Nation. (Old bill. For claim agent.) 

3. Relating to jurisdiction of Court of Claims. (Claim 

agent's bill. No action.) 

4. To protect insignia of Daughters of American Revolu- 

tion. (No action.) 

5. To contract for advertising in District of Columbia. 

6. Bill to regulate advertising in District of Columbia. 

(Attorney's bill. No action.) 

7. To amend law relative to homestead entries. (Copied 

and no action.) 

8. To erect public building at Jamestown, in New York. 



80 

(Outside of State. Passed Senate and referred to 
House Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds.) 
9. For relief of letter carriers. (By request, and no action. 
Henry M. Rose said to be retained by Postal Clerks' 
Association. Attended meeting of Association at 
Atlantic City.) 

10. To erect public building at Menominee, Mich. (The 

home of Sam Stephenson, his backer and banker. No 
action.) 

11. Donating condemned cannon to Michigan Soldiers' 

Home at Grand Rajiids. (Old bill. Substitute re- 
ported. Passed Senate and reported in House. No 
other action.) 

12. To incorporate National Society of Daughters of Amer- 

ican Revolution. (Reported adversely, House bill 
3553 having })assed as substitute.) 

13. To amend patent laws. (Introduced for an attorne}'. 

Old bill and no action.) 

14. For appointment of four additional Su})erintendents of 

Railway Service. (By request. No action. One to 
be for Henry M. Rose.) 

15. To reclassify railway ]iostal clerks. (By request. Re- 

ported back by Mr. Burrows from Post Office Com- 
mittee. Objected to and no further action.) 

16. To regulate anchorage and movements of vessels in St. 

Mary's River. (By request. Reported adversely and 
indefinitely postponed. House bill 477*.) having passed 
US substitute.) 

17. Providing for unlimited coinage of silver and gold. (No 

action.) 

18. To relieve from seizure in admiralty. (By request, and 

no action.) 
Of the fifty-four ])rivate bills but twelve were for constituents, and 
the rest were introduced at the request of claim agents. It was 
during this session that Mr. Burrows undertook to introduce in the 
Senate a tariff bill, on December 27, 1895. He stated, on securing 
the floor, that he desired to introduce a bill, and made an exi)lana- 
tion of its character, saying that the bill he ]H'op(>sed was to restore 
to the dutiable list the articles taxable under the Wilson act of 1890. 
Mr. Burrows was called to order bj' Senator Sherman, who stated 
tliat he desired to call the attention of Mr. liurrows to the fact that 
tiie Senate had no right to originatti a tariff l)ill, which, under the 
law, must originate in the House of Representatives, suggesting that 
it might be offered as an amendment to the House bill. Mr. Bur- 
rows replied that he intended to offer the lull that it might be con- 
sidered by the finance committee and included as an amendment 
to the House bill. Somebody wliisj)ered to Senator Burrows that it 
could not b(! oll'ered as a l)ill, and then Mr. Burrows got red in the 
face and sat down. Subsecpiently, after the Senate had adjourned, he 
went to the reporter of debates and interpolated these words : " Of 



81 

coarse I was aAvare of the fact that revenue bills could not originate 
in the Senate," and yet, in spite of this assumed knowledge and his 
long experience in the House of Representatives — nearly nine years 
on Ways and Means — he had deliberately tried to do it. Senator 
Sherman stepped on him prompth' and hard, and then Mr. Burrows 
was compelled to offer his bill as an amendment. 

An examination of the bill by an expert showed that the bill, 
enacting clause and reference, were in Senator Burrows' handwrit- 
ing, and yet Mr. Burrows claimed the right of membership of 
Finance because he was an " expert " on the tariff. 

2. In this session Mr. Burrows introduced three public and five 
private bills, viz : 

1. To purchase site for Government Printing Office. For 

years there had been a contest and squabble over the 
matter of a site, and this bill was introduced by him 
at the instance of an attorney or lobbyist. (No action 
was taken on it.) Further reference will be made to 
this. 

2. To give thirty days' sick leave to employes of the Gov- 

ernment Printing Office and Bureau of Engraving and 
Printing. (No action taken on it. Over 3,000 employes 
being beneficiaries at an annual cost of nearly $250,- 
000.) 

3. To incorporate National Grand Lodge of Order o^. Sons 

of Hermann. (By local request. No action taken.) 
Of the five private bills introduced by Mr. Burrows, but one was 
for a constituent. One bill was for the relief of legal representatives 
of John Roach, of Pennsylvania. Roach was a great ship-builder 
in his day, and his representatives put the claim into the hands of 
" Nat " McKay, the celebrated " lobbyist," who for years past has 
been the "chum" and boon companion of Senator Barrows, who in 
the 51st Congress, as will be shown, got through McKay's bill, which 
he has repeatedly and publicly stated realized him but $44,000 out 
of $115,000 appropriated, the rest being paid members, court and 
Department officials to secure its report and passage and settlement. 
The recent appearance of Burrows and McKay in Detroit, where 
they jointly occupied room 16 at the Russell House, is too well 
known to need particularizing, but will be illustrated. 

At the commencement of the 54th Congress, Mr. Burrows was 
made chairman of the unimportant Committee on Revision of the 
Laws, which had not met for years, and since his appointment as 
chairman has never met but once, and then only to have the com- 
mittee approve, as a matter of form, Burrows' appointment of Henry 
M. Rose as clerk. No bill, resolution, or petition has been even 
referred to that committee during Mr. Burrows' chairmanship, and, 
as showing its unimportance, it may be stated that Mr. Rose left 
Washington in Februar}' last ; returned here in June, remained two 
days and then skipped for Grand Rapids to resume the work of 
looking after Senator Burrows' campaign at a salary of $2,200 per 
annum, or $184 per month, every month Senator Burrows certifying 



82 

as chairman that Mr. Kose bad duly attended and performed the 
services of clerk. For this absolutel}^ unimportant committee, with- 
out business, and which lias never met but once, as stated. Senator 
Burrows has a small but gorgeously fitted committee room on tlie 
ground floor, situated near the department of public comfort, the 
restaurant, the stationery room, the private elevator, and the private 
stairway, at the following cost : 

Clerk, '^2,200 ; stenographer and typewriter, $1,200 ; messenger, 
$1,440 ; and laborer, $720 per annum. Total, $5,560, for doing noth- 
ing but work for Burrows' re-election. 

Fifty-Fifth Congress (Extra Session). 

1. In this session Mr. Burrows introduced twenty-eight l)ills, of 
which five were public bills ; all of which, save one, were bills pre- 
viously introduced by him, but of which two were ever favorably 
reported back. Of the twenty-three private bills, but seven were for 
constituents, and by this is meant residents of Michigan. Two bills, 
one for the relief of the heirs of John Eoach, and two others for the 
relief of the legal representatives of John Roach, were introduced 
by him and referred to the Committee on Claims, to which he (Bur- 
rows) personally requested to be assigned. Both bills were introduced 
within two weeks after the session commenced, and both were speedily 
reported back without amendment l)y Mr. Burrows, the most im- 
portant appropriating $380,151.42, of which "Nat" McKay, the 
lobbyist, was the attorue}', — though not a lawj-er, — McKay having a 
contract with the heirs and legal representatives for a fee of fifty per 
cent, on a completely adjudicated case. 

On February 11, 1898, Mr, Burrows asked unanimous consent 
for the present consideration of the bill (S. 958) for the relief of the 
legal representatives of John Roach, deceased, reported by him 
from the Committee on Claims. The Chair stated that the bill had 
been read on a former occasion and objected to. Tiiere being no 
objection to its consideration, the bill was again read, and passed, 
without a word of debate or explanation or even the reading of the 
accompanying report. The bill provided for the payment to the 
legal representatives of John Roach, deceased, tlie sum of $61,752.- 
51 in full payment and discharge of the claims of said Roach and 
his assigns for work done and material furnished in the construction 
of the U. 8. Double-Euder Gunboat Peoria. 

There having been some criticism in a New York paper of the 
intimacy between Senator Burrows and lobbyist " Nat " McKay, 
the fact l)eing stated that Mr. Burrows had sought service on the 
Committee on Claims ; that he referred three bills for the relief of 
the heirs and legal representatives of John Roach, tiie deceased 
shipbuilder ; that he reported them without amendment, and passed 
cue, without a word of debate or explanation, by unanimous 
consent, — for that reason he turned over the larger hill to Senator 
Quay, of Pennsylvania, in whose State John Roach lived and died, 
and the work for which payment was claimed having been done at 



83 

his shipyard near Philadelphia. On March 14, 1898, Senator 
Quay asked unanimous consent to take up Mr. Burrows' bill 
(S. 1116) to pay the heirs of the late John Roach, deceased, 
$330,151.42 for labor and material, dockage and attention, and 
occupation of yards and shops for the gunboats Chicago and 
Atlanta, which bill had been vetoed by President Cleveland after 
a careful and thorough examination of the bill by Attorney-General 
Garland. Tiie Chair stated that he had been informed that the 
bill had heretofore been read at length, when it was objected to ; 
and the bill, without further reading, explanation, or debate, or 
the reading of the accompanying report, was passed by the Senate, 
the record of the entire proceeding taking exactly ten lines in the 
Record. 

From this it appears that these two bills for the relief of the 
estate of John [ioach, amounting to $391,903.93, for which Mr. 
lobbyist " Nat " McKay, the bosom friend and boon companion of 
Senator Burrows, was attorne}', both of which were introduced by 
Senator Burrows, at McKay's request, instead of being introduced, 
as they should have been, by a Pennsylvania Senator, were reported 
by Senator Burrows without amendment from the Committee on 
Claims (to which he asked to be assigned) and one of them passed 
by him, the two bills being passed in less than five minutes, with- 
out explanation or a word of debate as to their merits, and without 
the reading of the accompanying report, as is usual. It was stated 
on the floor of the Senate during the recent session by Senator 
Morgan, of Alabama, during the debate on the Methodist Church 
claim, that lobbyist " Nat " McKay had received one-third of the 
entire amount of the Roach claim for passing the same. This is an 
error, as he received one-half. Therefore, McKay, who is not an 
attorue}' or an educated man, outside of his knowledge of shipbuild- 
ing — winch he has not pursued for over twenty-five 3'ears — receives 
a fee of $195,500. Is it any wonder that McKay, with the great 
fees and sums which he has received from these and numerous 
other claims, is enabled to live in a palatial mansion in Washington, 
with a dinner table built for sixty guests, and to give magnificent 
banquets to members of Congress, Department and court officials 
who vote for or examine and allow his claims, besides giving liberal 
" subscriptions " for the campaign expenditures of some of his 
"guests" who " happen " (?) to be in Congress? 

It will be remembered that during the first session of the Fifty- 
fifth Congress, after the Dingley tariff bill had been reported to 
the Senate by the finance committee, Mr. Burrows was appointed 
a member of the Committee on Finance to fill the vacancy occa- 
sioned by the appointment of Senator Sherman as Secretary of 
State. That vacancy had been purposely left open, neither side 
desiring it to be filled. There was a sharp contest between Senator 
Piatt, of New York, from the East, and Senators Thurston, o Ne- 
braska ; Hansbrough, of North Dakota ; Burrows, of Michigan, and 
Hanna, of Ohio, from the West. Senator Sewell, of New Jersey, for 
a time was a candidate, but instead went on the Committee on Ap- 



84 

propriatious. The vacancy belonged to the West, aiul iiuder the 
rule of seniority would naturally have gone to Senator Ilansbrough, 
by reason of his long service. The ambition of Senator Hanna for 
the place was a piece of absurdity which in any other man would 
have been impertinent. The contest narrowed down to one between 
Hansbrough — who was entitled to the place — and Burrows — who 
was not. The Chairman of the Standing Committee on Committees, 
which reported the assignment of Senators, was Senator McMillan, 
of Michigan. He very naturally desired the appointment of Sena- 
tor Burrows on the finance committee, upon the theory that he 
would thereby be enabled to do something more for Michigan than 
if he were not a member of the committee. He urged the fact that 
Senator Burrows had been a member of the Ways and Means Com- 
mittee of the House of Representatives for some years, and that as 
a result he was well equipped for service on the finance committee 
of the Senate. 

If any Senator had taken the trouble to examine the record of 
Mr. Burrows' service on the Ways and Means Committee, he would 
have ascertained that it amounted to very little. Mr. Burrows was 
a member during the consideration of the McKiidey bill, and be- 
sides making a sophomoric speech — which was written for him by a 
member of the Protective League of Philadelphia and New York — 
receiving also other help — and a few dozen brief remarks on certain 
items — in which he was badly " roasted " — there was absolutely 
nothing to his credit so far as a knowledge of the McKinley tariff 
act was concerned. He was merely there and an automaton would 
have answered every purpose. 

Mr. Burrows was also a member of the Ways and Means Com- 
mittee in the Fifty -third Congress, which passed the Wilson bill. 
It was passed precisely as were the McKinley and Dingley bills — 
under whip and spur — and there was little or no opj^ortunity for de- 
bate. Mr. Burrows made a sjieech and interjected a few cursory 
remarks on three or four items, and was again riddled by Demo- 
cratic members, who demonstrated Burrows' dense ignorance of the 
tariff, and especially of the details of the bill. The Wilson bill went 
to the Senate ; was there amended, the Sugar Trust Senators put- 
ting in everything they wanted, and was returned to the House. It 
was thrown into conference, and Mr. Burrows was one of the Repub- 
lican conferrees, but never met but once in full conference. The 
Democratic meml)ers of the conference committee — Senate and 
House — met and discussed the Senate amendments pro and con. 
Chairman Wilson and his associates fiatly refused to agree to the 
Senate amendments, and reported a disagreement, and askcnl a 
further conference, which was agreed to l)y the Senate. The Senate 
Democratic conferrees formally notified the House conferees — as did 
other Democratic members in the Senate — that unless the House 
accepted hi toto the Senate amendments, the bill would fail. After 
dallying along for weeks without agreeing, Speakei- Crisp took the 
bit in his teeth, and, through the aid of his lieutenants, forced the 
House to violate all previous practice and precedents, commit rape 



85 

on all recognized parliamentary law and practice, and agree to each 
and all of the Senate amendments. 

It is known to all the leading members of the House and Senate 
of long service that Mr. Burrows has no more knowledge of the un- 
derlying principles and the specific details of the tariff than a page 
boy. His ignorance in this regard has been the subject of laughter 
and ridicule. He has posed as an authority on the tariff, and he 
has been jeered at and made a laughing-stock of by Senators who 
reall}^ knew something about the subject. It is a matter of absolute 
certainty that but for the intervention and hard work of Senator 
McMillan for Mr. Burrows he never would have been appointed on 
the finance committee. Senator McMillan's motive was laudable, 
but the difficulty was that his colleague was a novice instead of being 
an expert on the tariff, and the only good he could accomplish for 
the State of Michigan was by making trades and deals for trifling 
matters. His record on the lumber question is too well known to 
recapitulate. As a member of the conference committee he deliber- 
ately disobe3^ed the instructions of the Senate by its vote, which re- 
duced the rate to one dollar. He was attacked and criticised for it, 
but, with his usual brazen assurance, laughed at all criticism as he 
has done in respect to the open and fair criticism of his public 
career by his constituents and the Michigan press. 

When in the Fifty-first Congress — which passed the McKiuley 
bill — he voted for free hides. In 1898, when a member of the 
finance committee, with the vast interests of Michigan at stake in 
this regard, he deliberately rejected the advice of " Uncle " Jim 
Monroe, Postmaster of Kalamazoo, and Judge M. C. Burch, one of 
his devoted friends and managers, who came here expressly to in- 
sist and demand that the Senator should stand by the interests of 
the farming, the tanning, and leather industr}^ of Michigan and again 
vote for free hides, as his colleague would have done had he been 
present instead of being at Mauchester-by-the-Sea. The interests 
of the furniture manufacturers of Grand Rapids, especially those 
interested in the glass schedule, were sacrificed, although Mr. 
Burrows pleaded, almost in tears, before the Republican conferrees — 
House and Senate — for a change in the schedule, which was favor- 
able to the Pittsburg glass interest. He said to the committee — and 
he will not dare deny this — that his re-election to the Senate was 
at stake if he did not get what he wanted in the glass schedule, as 
well as a two-dollar rate on lumber. The conferrees heard him 
plead and beg for a concession, and coolly voted him down by a vote 
of eight to two. Evidently his colleagues on the conference com- 
mittee considered it a matter of very slight importance whether he 
was re-elected or not. 

For the first time in the history of Congress a conference com- 
mittee of even membership was appointed. Senator Hanna had 
demanded that General Grosvenor, of Ohio, a member of the Ways 
and Means Committee, should go upon the conference committee to 
look after the wool interests of Ohio. As a result, and against the 
protest of Speaker Reed, a conference committee of eight on the 



86 

part of each house was appointed, as follows : Senators Allison, 
Aldrich, Piatt, of Connecticut; Burrows, Jones, of Nevada ; Test, 
Jones, of Arkansas, and White, and on the part of the House of 
Representatives : Dinejley, Payne, Dalzell, Hopkins, and Grosvenor 
(Republicans), and Bailey, McMilliu, and Wheeler (Democrats). It 
will be reniembered that Senator Burrows was called sharply to 
account by Senators Teller and Pettigrew for his misconduct, not 
only in respect to the lumber schedule, but for his violation of the 
instructions of the Senate, which had fixed the rate at one dollar, 
but which by the vote of Mr. Burrows in conference was changed 
to two dollars, and in the closing hours of Congress was rammed 
through with a bare quorum in the Senate, and no possibility of 
holding it twenty-four hours longer. 

A publication in the Norihicetitern Linnlerman of February 27, 
1897, should not be forgotten. That publication was quoted by 
Senator Burrows as entirely reliable and truthful in all its statements 
during the debate on the lumber schedule. In that issue it said : 

" Now, you take our average cut of the United States, and $1 a 
thousand advance means what ? It means i^35,000,000 to the lumber- 
men of the United States in a year. So, if we carry out this idea, !$1 
duty does not take it to that. Lumber in Canada would come down a 
whole dollar, and it would not help us any. Get it up to about ^2 
and then it would begin to have its effect. To illustrate a little 
further : There was a lot of gentlemen from the Northwest, up 
Minnesota wa}', in Washington the other day, and they were sitting 
in Senator Burrows' committee room. An interesting incident 
occurred there. Senator Burrows is chairman of the committee. 
The committee had not had a meeting for a long time. We happened 
to be sitting in that room, and one of the gentlemen from Minnesota 
had an envelope and a lead pencil. He walked around the room 
and he ciphered out a little bit, and he said : ' Mr. Burrows, do you 
know what ^1 a thousand would mean to this little crowd of men 
here ? ' There were not as many in the room as there are here. He 
said the advance of SI a thousand on lumber meant $6,125,000 on 
last year's product." 

From this it will be seen that the American people are to pay an 
annual tribute of not only $35,000,000 to these timber or lumber 
barons, l)ut at the doubled rate of two dollars per thousand will pay 
$70,000,000 of " trust protection " which goes into the pockets of 
the little group of millionaires who dictate the election of Senators 
in the lumber States, and who had their headquarters during the 
})endency of the tariff bill in Senator l>urrows' committee room on 
the Revision of the Laws, which committee never meets. 

The argument is presented on behalf of Senator Burrows, and 
most strenuously urged, that his long service in the House and his 
four years in the Senate ])eculiarly qualify him to serve the State of 
Michigan better than anybody else who can be named. An exami- 
nation of the foregoing table of bills — public and jn-ivate— which 
have been carefully compiled from the CougreHsioudl Record by an 
expert who, during the entire period of Mr. Burrows' service in the 



87 

House, has been perfectly familiar with his course and record, will 
demonstrate conclusively the truth of the assertion that Mr. Burrows 
has accomplished not a single measure of importance or anything 
in excess of that accomplished by the " average member." It can 
be shown that the late Senator Conger accomplished more for Mich- 
igan in one Congress than Julius Cfesar Burrows has done in his 
twenty years of service. There may be some slight and unim- 
portant errors in the statement of bills, but it has been verified by 
another expert who is entirely disinterested in the matter. 



Julius Caesar Burrows Reputation 

in Washington as a 

''Columbian Orator'' Fadinp". 



NEVER A LEADER IN EITHER HOUSE 
OF CONGRESS. 



His Intimacy With Lobbyist "Nat" McKay Has Wrecked 

What Little Influence He Had Among Honest 

and Conservative Members. 



The first speech of Julius Coesar Burrows in Congress was made 
in the House of Representatives on December 17, 1873, on the re- 
peal of the so-called " salary-grab " law enacted in the last session 
of the previous Congress. It was a popular bill, and everybody 
sought the floor to support it, Mr. Burrows getting five minutes in 
the " shuflle." In the course of his brief speech he stated that he 
was " unalterably opposed to any measure which proposes to restore 
the obnoxious mileage system. It is odious to the American people 
and unjust to the members of the House." At that time, as now, 
railroad passes were freely furnished to members of Congress on 
application, and the mileage law, therefore, which gave to members 
more than it actually cost them for travelling expenses, was a faulty 
system. In lieu of that, however, Mr. Burrows proposed a salary of 



S8 

$5,500 per aunuin, an iucrease of $500 over the old law, and he voted 
in that direction. 

On Marcli 14 he read a speech on the interstate commerce bill, in 
which he denounced the railroad and other corporations of the 
country as " railroad monarchs," " giant manipulators," " corporate 
monsters," and generally rivaled Dennis Kearney in his abuse and 
denunciation of great corporate interests. The following concluding 
extracts from his speech will illustrate this : 

" This mighty people in the main are tillers of the soil gathering 
from these acres an annual product of $1,200,000,000. The value 
of these products depends in no small degree upon the facility and 
cheapness Avith which they can be placed in the markets of the 
world. I icould therefore taal'e broad and devp every river )ri thin 
her hordcrs as the means of the cheapest transportation, ajid throuijh 
lohich her exuberant commerce might float unobstructed to the sea. 

"But, when 30U have accomplished this great work, the difficulty 
is not wholly removed. There are seasons of the year when these 
natural avenues are closed bj' the severity of our climate, during 
which period these products must perish or seek outlet through the 
State and over these interstate roads. If no restrictions can be im- 
posed upon tiiese corporations, the entire commerce of the West 
may be at the mercy of a single man, and such tvil)ute may be im- 
posed upon it as to utterly destro}' its value to the producer, or 
place it beyond the reach of all consumers but the most opulent. 

" That this commerce has felt the burden of unjust taxation at the 
hands of these railroad monarchs no one would presume to deny or 
justify. Seventy-one thousand miles of iron rail interlacing these 
States have enabled a few men to wield a power over commerce at 
once dangerous and destructive. But not here alone has its power 
been felt. It has manipulated caucus and convention, made and 
unmade legislatures, tampered with the purity of the judiciary ; 
nay, more, it has stalked with royal retinue through the lobbies of 
this Capitol, marking its victims and smiling upon its pliant retain- 
ers. 

" 1 know, sir, it is as much as a man's political fortunes are worth 
to stand in the pathway of this almost omnipotent power ; but 
while I will go as far as he ' who goes farthest ' in protecting these 
coi])orations in the enjoyment of every just right, they shall do no 
wrong to the humblest citizen if my vote or my voice can prevent it. 

" In this sjurit come the six million tillers of the soil, and ask 
protection at our hands. They come not with bullet nor bayonet ; 
not with hostile banner, but with the ballot, that mighty — 

' Weapou tliat foiues down as still 
As suow-fliikes upon the sod ; 
But exei'Utes tlie freeman's will, 

As lightning does the will of God.' " 

It is more than probable that Mr. Burrows will recall this poetry, 
whicli was (^xtensiveh- (juottul against him in his campaign for the 
Forty-fourth Congress, in whicli he was badly defeated by Allen 
Potter. It is noticeable that although Mr. Burrows has made num- 



89 

erous speeches since that occasion, he has never repeated this 
poetry, which is really of a very high order. 

As this speech was made on Saturday, the day being devoted to 
debate only in the Committee on the Whole House on the state of 
the Union, the speech of the " Columbian Orator " — for it was in 
this Congress that that title Avas bestowed on him by the late 
"Sunset" Cox — did not attract special attention. An examination 
of it (Record, p. 2152 to 2157), in connection with other speeches 
which preceded it, will disclose the fact that it is made up prin- 
cipally from citations from other speeches and of quotations from 
decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States, which had 
already done duty in the debate. 

I was then clerk of the Committee on War Claims, and we 
boarded within two squares of each other on Thirteenth street. 
He asked me to assist him in the preparation of this speech, which 
work I very cheerfully did, carefully examining other speeches for 
judicial decisions, etc. We were then good friends, although I had 
opposed his election and supported Hon. Allen Potter for that 
Congress. Extracts from this speech were printed in the Kala- 
mazoo Telegraph, and that paper highly commended him for his 
attack upon the "railroad monarchs " and his argument in favor of 
water transportation. No man looking over the devious and 
crooked record of Julius C;esar Burrows during the past fifteen 
years in Congress would suppose that in 1874 he had denounced 
the managers of railroads as " monarchs ; " would charge that these 
" monarchs " had " manipulated caucuses and conventions, made 
and unmade legislatures, tampered with the purity of the judiciary," 
and, finally, " had stalked with royal retinue through the lobbies of 
this Capitol, marking its victims and smiling upon its pliant 
retainers." One is reminded of the paragraph in " Lochiel's 
Warning " — 

" 'Tis the sunset of life that gives me mystical lore, 
Aud coming events cast their shadows before." 

Little did Julius C?esar Burrows then dream that he would ever 
be the pliant tool of great railway, telegraph, express, and other 
corporations ; that, according to Schuyler S. Olds, he would ever 
" fr}" the fat " out of great manufacturers in order to reach the 
United States Senate, where he would be able to look after their 
interests. Little did he think that the time would come when he_ 
would stand up in both houses of Congress as the supporter of the 
Pennsylvania Railroad against the interests of the Michigan Central 
and the other great railroads of the State of Michigan, in the matter 
of building a bridge over the Detroit River, and yei, when a dele- 
gation of Detroit citizens came here only a little over two years ago 
in Gen. Alger's private car, and appeared before the Committee on 
Commerce of the Senate to argue in behalf of Senator McMillan's 
bill for the construction of a bridge across the Detroit River, Senator 
Julius Ciesar Burrows held back ; had his doubts about the wisdom 
and propriety of it ; thought it ought to be looked into ; thought a 



90 

tuunel a better plan ; wanted to wait to see how the big bridge 
over the Hudson River came out, etc. No wonder the managers of 
the Michigan Central and other Michigan roads have at last got 
their eyes open to the duplicity, treachery, and demagoguery of 
this man, whose star has been steadily fading since reaching the 
Senate, who is without influence in tliat body, and who, on the 
fourth of March next, if the legislature of Michigan does its duty, 
will suft'er a total eclipse and retire to the obscurity of private life, 
where he would have been left after his vile treachery to the late 
Senator Francis B. Stockbridge, but for the kindness of that most 
amiable gentleman, and for other reasons stated elsewhere. 

In the second session of that Congress Mr. Burrows made his 
celebrated " blood3'-shirt " speech on the civil rights bill, which 
destroyed all possible hope of the admission of the Territor}^ of New 
Mexico into the Union. The bill had been reported unanimously 
from the Committee on Territories, through the indefatigable exer- 
tions of Mr. Elkins, the delegate from that Territory, now Senator 
from AA^est Virginia. As a result the bill would have been supported 
by the South almost unanimous!}', but the bitter and malignant 
speech of Mr. Burrows induced scores of Democratic members to 
change their minds, and the bill failed. 

In the first session, Fortj'-sixth Congress, Mr, Burrows made a 
" set " speech on the legislative appropriation bill, also incidental 
remarks, in which the South was bitterly denounced. Still shaking 
the " bloody shirt." 

In the second session he read a column eulogy on Zachariah 
Chandler, who had objected to and defeated the bill of Burrows' 
" dear friend," lobbyist " Nat " McKay, in the Forty-first Congress, 
and ordered him from the floor of the Senate. 

In the first session of the Forty-seventh Congress he made a 
speech on the apportionment of Representatives under the census 
of 1880, on which speech I rendered him some assistance ; but his 
" set " speech — so to speak — consisted of a carefully prepared argu- 
ment by Robert P. Porter, subsequently Chairman of the Tarifl" 
Commission, on the bill for the creation of that commission. 

In the second session of that Congress he was appointed Chair- 
man of the select Committee on Mississippi River Improvements, 
and printed a speech on that subject, as well as on the river and 
harbor bill, which had been prepared by the clerk of the select 
committee, Mr. Crawford, a newspaper man of culture and ability, 
reporting a bill for extravagant levee appropriations for the benefit 
of plantation owners. 

In the Forty-eighth Congress Mr. George L. Yaple, of Mendon, 
did the speaking for the Kalamazoo district, having defeated Mr. 
Burrows on account of the hitter's wobbling course on the river and 
harbor bill, elsewhere stated, but more particularly on account of 
the broken pledges of the " Columbian Orator " extending over the 
entire district. 

In the Fort} -ninth Congress Mr. Burrows made a seven-column 
speech on the bill for the relief of General Fitz John Porter. Ex- 



91 

President Grant from his dying bed had declared that Fitz John 
Porter had been deeply wronged. Other military men of great 
renown, including Generals Sherman and Sheridan, had united with 
General Grant in that opinion. It was reserved, however, for 
Captain Burrows, who " went into the army late and retired early " — 
according to ex-Governor Blair — to denounce this bill and pander 
to the passing prejudice of the day, as he has invariably done 
throughout his entire Congressional career. Fortunately this speech 
of the " Columbian Orator" hardly made a ripple on the surface. 
The greater portion of it was printed without reading, and I 
remember distinctly the fact, as the papers of the day will show, 
that Mr. Burrows attracted no attention whatever. Later he made 
a five-page speech on the post-ottice appropriation bill, and still 
later another five-page speech on the Senate amendments to that 
bill, which speeches, it was stated at the time, were prepared by an 
official of the Post-Office Department, then, as now, a resident of the 
State of Michigan. He is still living in Washington, and still in the 
service, but I am not at liberty to mention his name. 

In the second session he made a five-page speech favoring sub- 
sidies for a South American mail service, which was the pet scheme 
of Collis Huntington of Pacific Railroad fame. Who prepared this 
speech I do not know, but I do know this, that he displayed such 
ignorance of the details of the subject that he desired not to be 
interrupted as to its details. 

In this Congress the Committee on Rules, following the recom- 
mendation I liad made in a previous magazine article for the distri- 
bution of the several general appropriation bills, with other im- 
portant reforms, made a report in exact harmony with my ideas. 
Mr. Carlisle was Speaker, and the report was made by Colonel 
Morrison, of Illinois, then chairman of the Committee on Ways and 
Means. Mr. Burrows had not taken any ground in the matter 
beyond saying that he favored the taking away of some of the bills 
and generally supporting the recommendations I had made. Colonel 
Morrison is not an orator, and he was anxious to have Mr. Burrows 
speak in behalf of the report. I said to him, "If you will allow 
Burrows to close the general debate in a ' spread-eagle ' speech, you 
will catch him." Colonel Morrison thereupon went to Mr. Burrows 
and asked him to make the closing speech on his behalf, saying 
that he would yield the floor for that purpose. The " Columbian 
Orator" jiimped at the opportunity as a lively chicken would at a 
straggling June-bug, and made that speech on December 17, 1885 
(Record, p. 292--3). 

Any person who will take the pains to read it will discover 
that it is a good speech, and I take legitimate and lawful pride in it, 
for I wrote it. My speech closed with this sentence : " Let me say 
to this (Republican) side of the House that the day of deliverance 
from the oppression of the old rules is at hand. You understand 
what these old rules mean, and if you vote for them, it is a self- 
organized tyranny ; and if hereafter the chains gall, do not com- 
plain ; it is your deliberate act. [Great applause.] 



92 

" I trust, however, that this House will break these fetters, assert 
its manhood, and invite freedom, the freedom of tlie membership 
of this House, and adopt a code of rules which comports with the 
liberty of our institutions and the dignity and intelligence of this 
l)ody, and enable the House of Representatives to meet in some 
slight degree the expectation of an enlightened constituency." 
[Loud applause.] 

The House then proceeded to consider the re])ort under the five- 
minute rule. I left my seat at the Clerk's desk to go to my room to 
write up the morning proceedings in my journal. As I passed up 
the aisle ex-Gov. Long, of Massachusetts, now Secretary of the Navy, 
stopped me and extended his hand, saying, with a smile, " I con- 
gratulate you, Harry, on the splendid speech that Mr. Burrows 
has just delivered for you. It does you great credit." Of course 
I denied the " soft impeachment," and I presume I was complimented 
by at least twenty members, who knew I had written the speech 
which Burrows delivered. It will be a very easy matter for Senator 
Burrows to obtain from Secretary Long a denial of this assertion, 
if he desires to do so, and the Secretary's address is still, " Navy 
Department, Washington, D. C." 

In the Fiftieth Congress Burrows made a seven-page speech on 
the Mills tariff bill. The Protective League of Philadelphia had 
furnished him a vast amount of material to use in attacking this bill, 
which Mr. Burrows found himself entirely unable to digest. I was 
then a special clerk in the Senate of the Finance and Appropriation 
(Jommittees, and was engaged on tariff work. At his request, I 
went over this material, tabulated it, boiled it down, made many sug- 
gestions, and to-day I can take up the speech and point out many 
paragraphs which I had the honor to originate. 

Later he made a three-column speech on the statue of Lewis 
Cass, most of the material of which was furnished him from Kala- 
mazoo b}' a gentleman of recognized ability, who was requested by 
Mr. Burrows to collect material for this purpose. 

In the Fifty-first Congress Mr. Burrows made a six- column speech 
on the McKinley tariff bill. The material for that speech also came 
largely from Philadelphia, some from Pittsburg, and some from 
Boston. I saw the material ; was at his room often during the 
preparation of the speech, and was repeatedly made to suffer hj 
hearing him repeat it, walking up and down the room, committing 
to uKMuory soukj of its choicest passages. 

I was removed from the office of Journal Clerk shortly after the 
commencement of the Fifty-second Congress, for the atrocious crimes 
of being a Republican and of having been very zealous in assisting 
Speaker Reed during the preceding Congress. Nothing of im])ort- 
ance 0(u;urred, however, during that Congress, and Mr. Burrows 
made no "set" speech worthy of note. It was the day of "pop 
gun " tariff l)ills, under the k^ad of Mr. Springer, which werti rammed 
through the House and then pigeon-holed in the Senate without 
receiving the slightest consideration. 

In the Fifty-tliird Congress, first (extra) session, called by Presi- 



93 

dent Cleveland for the purpose of repealing the Sherman act, Mr. 
Burrows made a " set " speech on the free coinage of silver. It was 
a "straddle speech," and it rung the changes about the silver dollar 
being worth as much as a gold dollar, and it is a speech which ex- 
Represeutative'Milnes, or present Representative Todd, could have 
made with perfect propriety and consistency. It was interspersed 
with a discussion of the tariif, and all the way through it Mr. Bur- 
rows labored heavily at the oar to show that the Republican party 
was the friend of silver and that there was no occasion for the ex- 
istence of a separate silver party, the members of which ought to 
come in and support the Republican ticket. Of course, Mr. Burrows 
discussed bimetallism, and, of course, he juggled with that question, 
occasionally giving a slap at silver " monometallism," just to show 
that he was impartial. In the course of this speech Mr. Burrows 
went dead back on his speech of 1874, in the Forty-third Congress, 
and came to the defence of the railroad monarchs. The entire 
speech was a fraud, a delusion and a snare. It threw no light on 
the great living question of the hour ; it furnished no new informa- 
tion to anybody, and it was, therefore, a characteristic speech. 

During the second session the Wilson bill was reported, and, as a 
matter of course, Mr. Burrows again discussed it. As elsewhere 
stated, this speech was largely prepared by Mr. Smith D. Fry, the 
correspondent of the Detroit Tribune and the private clerk of Mr. 
Burrows. He is an able and facile writer, and he marshaled columns 
and battalions of formidable statistics. It was a better speech than 
Mr. Burrows could possibly write, and it is the speech which Mr. 
Burrows desired printed in full in the Kalamazoo Telegraph, which 
Editor Diugley declined to do, offering to print it as a supplement 
if Mr. Barrows would pay the expense of its composition. 

In the Fifty-fourth Congress Mr. Burrows went to the Senate. He 
made a speech, prepared by some statistical writer, on the subject 
of bond issues. But aside from offering a tariff' bill, which was ruled 
out of order, as noted elsewhere, he did very little except to attract 
occasional attention by airing his oratory on trifling matters. In the 
first session he made a seven-page speech on the Dingley tariff' bill, 
devoted, as one would naturally suspect, to the dut}'^ on lumber. 
The material for that speech was, of course, furnished by the two- 
dollar " lumber barons," and it is quite likely that the Blodgetts 
hired a " ready writer " to do the drudgery for Mr. Burrows. The 
speech is punctured with extracts drawn from the Northwestern 
Lumhernidu and other sources, and derives its chief importance from 
the fact that it proves conclusively the charge of Schuyler S. Olds, 
that Mr. Burrows had " sold himself, body and soul, to the Blodg- 
etts, who had nominated in the bond, before they put up a dollar 
for his election, that he should stand to the last for the two-dollar 
lumber rate." 

AVhen the so-called Teller resolution was under debate in the 
Senate, Mr. Burrows felt called upon to define his position. That 
resolution was an exact duplicate of the Matthews resolution, which 
passed both houses of Congress twenty years ago, the Michigan 



94 

delegation then solidly supporting it, save Senator Chandler in the 
Senate and Mr. Ellsworth in the House. Mr. Burrows was out of 
Congress at the time, hut he su])ported it on the stuniji, and I have 
his record on that point. When Mr. Burrows was elected to the 
Senate in January, 1895, he necessarily vacated his seat in the 
House, and a special election was called to fill the vacancy. Hon. 
Alfred Mihes, of Coldwater, was nominated and ran on a straddle 
]>latforn), although it squinted hardest toward the gold side of the ques- 
tion. The Ilepublican party had not then taken pronounced ground 
on this question, and in accordance with his uniform practice Mr. 
Burrows dodged the issue. No word came from him in that cam- 
paign in behalf of Mr. Milnes, who was elected b}' a very slender 
majority. Instead of his clarion voice, which, according, to " Gen- 
eral" Yusef, "wakes the echoes," etc., Senator Burrows, according 
to Schuyler S. Olds, " skwlked in New York and remained under 
cover, like the artful doger that he is." Mr. Burrows not only did 
not make a speech in behalf of Mr. Milnes ; did not write a letter ; 
did not contril)ute a cent, nor did he even send a "strengthening" 
or encouraging telegram. He was willing to sacrifice his old dis- 
trict in order to feed his vanity with the theory that he alone could 
carry that district. He was " casting an anchor to windward," so 
that in the event of his defeat for re-election to the Senate in Jan- 
uary, 1899, he would be able to fall back on the old Kalamazoo dis- 
trict and return to the House of Representatives, as ex-President 
John Quincy Adams had done. In fact, he said as much to a mem- 
ber of the present Michigan delegation. Feeling, therefore, the 
necessity of showing his liand and that he was in harmony with the 
advanced ground taken by the Republican party at the St. Louis 
convention and later, he stepped into the Treasury Department 
one day last spring and asked Secretary Gage to suggest something new 
for him to say about the Teller resolution. Secretary Gage is a 
very busy man, and he had no time to write or even suggest a 
speech even for Senator Burrows. The Secretary is, however, for- 
tunate in possessing a private secretary who is one of the most ac- 
complished writers and statisticians in the employ of the Treasury 
Dejiartment. He called in that gentleman and turned 'Mr. Burrows 
over to him. The i)rivate secretary is also one of the most oblig- 
ing and agreeal)le gentlemen in the Treasury service, and although 
burdened with important and responsible duties, really doing the 
work of three men, he expressed his willingness, as a matter of pub- 
lic duty, to write a speech for Senator Julius Ca'sar Burrows, which 
he ([u], and which tliat gentleman read (after making the ])relimi- 
nary reqnc^st that he did not desire to be interrupted) with 
groat unction. Tlie speech was a fine one and was well read. 
It was written on Treasury Department paper, and I called 
the attention of the correspondent of a prominent Republican paper 
to the fact that Senator Burrows was reading somebody else's 
speech, and an inspection of the manuscript, which was turned over 
to the Senate reporter, after the Stmator had conchided its reading, 
disclosed the fact tliat it bore the Treasury water-mark. 



95 

In fiue, tlie older members of Congress and the veteran corre- 
spondents here have got the exact size of Mr. Burrows' brain and 
know his mental equipment. As a matter of courtesy, and to give 
a bit of eclat to the Republican side of the case, they give attention 
to a few opening sentences, and then, like the Arabs, " silently steal 
away." An examination of all his speeches — save those written for 
him — will show there is nothing that will live or which had any 
influence at the time. At his request I drew a resolution which he 
offered and the House adopted in the Fifty-second Congress, calling 
on the Secretaries of War and the Treasury and the Attorney- 
General for the amount of war claims pending in their respective 
departments and, as Acting Register of the Treasury, I was assigned 
the duty of answering for the Treasury Department. I made an 
elaborate report which was freely and frequentl}^ dra^vn upon by 
Republican papers and speakers throughout the campaign, and also 
prepared the outline of a speech for Mr. Burrows on that subject. 
I have his letters of request for assistance and of thanks to show for 
this work of mine. 



JULIUS CiESAR BURROWS MAKES TWO FARCICAL 

CONTESTS FOR SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE 

OF REPRESENTATIVES. 



Judge Jay A. Hubbell Refused to Support Him For Speaker in 
Forty-Seventh Congress. — Burrows Gets a Virginia Carpet 
Bagger in His Place and Sells Out Michigan Delegation for 
Important Committee Positions for Himself. — Lord, Willetts, 
Lacey, Webber, Spaulding, of St. John's, Rich, and Horr Left 
in the Lurch. 



Tlie Forty-seventh Congress was Republican by a small majority, 
and Julius Caesar Burrows, having, under my tutorship and coach- 
ing — all of which the " world knows," and which he has verbciUy 
and in -writing often acknoAvledged — become a fairl}' good parlia- 
mentarian, decided to become a candidate for Speaker. The other 
candidates were Messrs. Reed, of Maine ; Hiscock, of New York ; 
Kasson, of Iowa, and Keifer, of Ohio. As usual, there were two or 
three other minor candidates with complimentary votes from their 
State delegations, who dropped out of the race after the first ballot, 
these candidates, like Burrows, selling out for committee place. Mr. 
Burrows announced his candidacy in the last session of the Forty- 
sixth Congress, and made an active campaign through the winter 
and spring, summer and fall of 1881 for that place, with the net re- 



96 

suit of losing the vote aud iDflueuce of Judge Hubbell, of the Upper 
Peninsula, then Chairman of the Republican Congressional Com- 
mittee, and gaining in his place the vote of an obscure carpet bagger 
from Virginia, who was the personal propert}' of Gen. Mahone. 

Of the nine Repul)lican members of the delegation but one — Ilorr, 
of East Saginaw — was originally for Burrows. Judge Hubbell was 
entitled to the support of the delegation for the Speakership, if the 
delegation desired to present a candidate. He had served contin- 
uously through the Forty-third, Forty-fourth, Forty-fifth, and Forty- 
sixth Congresses, and had become prominent and influential on the 
door of the House. He was a member of the Committee on Appro- 
priations of the Forty-sixth Congress, and was fairly entitled by his 
position to the honor. He did not seek the place, however, though 
better qualified for it than Burrows, but believed the delegation 
should support Mr. Hiscock, of New York, for the reason tiiat the 
tariff and other great interests of New York and Michigan were 
identical in many respects, and that the delegation would be treated 
better by Hiscock than it would be by any other successful Western 
candidate. 

Mr. Burrows' candidacy met no res])onse M'hatever. All of the 
members of the delegation, except Judge Hubbell and Messrs. 
Willetts and Horr, were new members and had no acquaintance and 
could do nothing for him. He asked my assistance in the campaign, 
and I made an earnest and zealous efibrt in his behalf, but met with 
such little success that I was obliged to tell him just before Con- 
gress assembled in December, 1881, that he did not stand the ghost 
of a show for the nomination and tluit he had better withdraw, so 
as not to disclose his weakness. He steadily refused to do so, and 
up to the meeting of the caucus went about AVashington boasting 
that he had at least thirty votes— precisely as he is now boasting 
that lie has eighty pledged votes in the legislature — and when the 
caucus was held received exactly nine votes. 

There was a stubborn contest, and after awhile, through the eti'orts 
of Senator Cameron and Representative Robeson, of New Jersey, 
the P(Minsylvania delegation left Hiscock and " broke " for Keifer, 
and Burrows went with it, as per agreement, receiving in return a 
position on tlu^ important Committee on Appropriations and 
Chairmanship of the Committee on Territories, with a good com- 
mittee room and an annual clerk. The' otlier members of the 
delegation fared badly, except Judge Hubbell and Mr. Willetts, 
wiio was made a member of the Committee on Ways and Means 
ill spite of Burrows' effort to keep him off, and they were 
entitled to these places and got no help from Burrows. Mi; 
Lord, of Detroit, was fifth on Foreign Affairs. Mr. Willetts, of 
^roiiroe, was put second on Judiciary and Chairman of the Com- 
iiiitt(M^ on Expenditures in the Department of Justice, which, like 
Mr. Burrows' present Committee on the Revision of the Laws, never 
met. Mr. Lacey was appointed fourth on Post Offices and Post 
Pvoads and fourth on the Committee on Coinage, Weights aud 
Measures. Mr. Webljer was ap])ointed on Banking and Currency 



97 

and on the Committee on Revolutionary Pensions. Gen. Spaulding, 
of St. John's, by virtue of his splendid military record and conceded 
executive ability, was appointed on the Committee on Military 
Affairs and on Indian Affairs. Mr. Rich was appointed sixth on 
Agriculture and also on the Committee on Mileage which meets 
once each session. Mr. Horr — the protege of Mr. Burrows —was 
appointed on the Committee on Commerce, which then had charge 
of the river and habor bill. The members of the delegation, how- 
ever, felt that they had been treated badly, and they did not hesi- 
tate to tell Mr. Burrows so in very plain terms, with the result, 
with the possible exception of Gen. Spaulding — who never quarrels 
with anybody — there Avas a great deal of friction in the delegation, 
and its influence was largely nullified by the efforts of Mr. Bur- 
rows towards his own personal aggrandizement. 

During the first session of that Congress, Mr. Burrows voted for 
the river and harbor bill on its original passage by the House. Then 
he voted against the first conference report on the bill, which slightly 
reduced an appropriation for a harbor in his district, but increased 
immensely the amount for Michigan's great lake and harbor interests, 
amounting in the aggregate to over 1750,000. Then he voted to 
table the motion to reconsider the vote rejecting the conference re- 
port, and finally voted against the second conference report ; and 
at last he crowned the absurdit}^ of his crooked and "wobbling" 
course, after President Arthur had vetoed the bill by turning a 
double back somersault and voting to pass the bill over Presi- 
dent Arthur's veto. I remember well the state of mind he was 
in while this bill was pending, and how the members of the dele- 
gation, except Mr. Willetts — who voted against the bill — pounded 
him for his inconsistent course. Mr. Horr, of Saginaw, told him in 
the cloak-room of the House, in the presence of a dozen members, 
while the roll was being called, that he was " a coward and a fool," 
and at last dragooned him into voting for the passage of the bill 
over the President's veto. His conduct in regard to that bill lost 
him the confidence and respect of the House, and from that time he 
was almost entirely without influence during that session. 



BURROWS' SECOND PREPOSTEROUS CANDIDACY 
FOR SPEAKER. 



Burrows Has the Solid Delegation After Much Dragooning and 
One Additional Vote, Another Carpet Bagger From Virginia, 
also the Property of Gen. Mahone. — Again Sells Out the 
Delegation. 

The Fifty-first Congress was Republican by a small majority, and 
Mr. Burrows again decided to be a candidate for Speaker, making 



98 

during the second session of the Fiftieth Congress an active cam- 
paign for the phice. The Ilepiiblicau members of the delegation 
were Allen, O'Dounell, Burrows, Belknap, Brewer, Bliss, Cutcheon, 
Wheeler, and Stephenson. Messrs. O'Dounell, Brewer, Bliss, and 
Cutcheon were the only members of prior service, and of all the 
delegation the onl}' man who was sincerely and honestly for Bur- 
rows for Speaker was Stephenson — who conld not influence a vote — 
then serving his first term. The Republican members of the dele- 
gation met at the " Elsmere," Mr. Burrows' boarding house, on 
Thursday night before the caucus and discussed the situation. 
There had been correspondence between the members of the dele- 
gation during the summer, and occasional conferences between them 
as they happened to meet in Detroit. It was clearly apparent that 
there was no " call " for Burrows outside of Michigan, and very little 
inside of it. Burrows made a great parade of pledges, claiming, as 
in the Forty-seventh Congress, that he had at least thirty votes 
pledged outside of Michigan. Most of the members of the delega- 
tion wrote me during the summer and fall asking as to the situation 
and Burrows' prospects, and desiring me to look the matter up. I 
replied frankly that I had written over fifty members to inquire what 
the}- thought about Burrows, and had personally in(piired of fifty 
more mIio had visited Wasliiugton during the iuterregnuu], and was 
able to say that the only man who " talked Burrows " was Hon. 
Charles S. Baker, of New Tork. Finally, at the request of Hon. 
Mark S. Brewer, of Pontiac — whose letter I happen to have — I 
wrote Mr. Baker, at Rochester, N. Y., on November o, and asked 
him squarely if Burrows' claim that he (Baker) was pledged to vote 
for him for Speaker was correct or not. Under date of November 
7 — and I have the letter before me — he said, among other things ; 
" I don't care very much about Burrows, although I think he is, 
perhaps, the best fitted for Speaker, all things considered, to be 
found in the Fifty-first Congress. You have made him a good par- 
liamentarian, and that is what we want. Of course, you know the 
New York delegation has adopted the two-thirds rule to govern it, 
so I suppose Ave shall all have to vote solid for Reed." 

I showed that letter to Mr. Burrows, who begged me to destroy it 
or give it to him. I refused to do either. I told iiim that I had 
earnestly supported him in the Forty-seventh Congress for Speaker, 
l)elieving that among so many candidates he had a show, and as we 
had a solid delegation then it was all right ; liut I had learned more 
about him since, and in view of the very narrow Republican mnjovity 
in tlie House — five to start with — and the necessity of having a 
strong aggressive and ])Ositive man in the chair, I tiiought Tiiomas 
B. Reed, of Maine, was best fitted for Speaker, with David B. Hen- 
derson, of Iowa, or Mr. Cannon as a second choice. I knew that 
the Michigan delegation was divided ; that Gen. Cutcheon and two 
or three others tiiought Mr. Reed the best man ; tiiat Mr. Brewer 
was for Joe Cannon, of Illinois, as he would ap])()iut ]5rewer on A])- 
})ropriatious ; that O'Dounell and one other member were for Mc- 
Kinley, and that as a matter of fact, with the exception of Stephen- 



99 

son, the cl legation didn't care even a half a d — u for Julius Caesar 
Burrows. T showed Mr. Baker's letter to several members of the 
delegation, as well as other letters I had received, among others one 
from Mr. Dorsey, of Nebraska, who Mr. Burrows counted on as 
" dead sure " — precisely as the "Orator" and " Friday " Rose are 
now counting on eighty members of the legislature as " dead sure " 
for him for Senator. 

Mr. Burrows opened headquarters at the National Hotel, and sub- 
sequently took a parlor at the Riggs House. Members of the dele- 
gation drifted in and out ; but there was no zeal, no hard work, no 
enthusiasm, "no nothing" in his behalf, for the candidacy of Mr. 
Burrows was ridiculed and riddled by the leading papers of the 
countr}', as well as b}' the Washington press, — which put him in the 
"also ran " column — and if anything more had been needed to cast 
ridicule and disgrace upon it, it was furnished when Mr. Burrows 
accepted the otier of the correspondent of a Democratic paper of a 
large Northern city to act as his manager ; and, as illustrating the 
character of the person referred to, I will say that he had not long 
before attempted to blackmail a prominent statistician of the coun- 
try out of live hundred dollars by demanding that sum from him in 
return for surrendering a somewhat amorous letter from the statisti- 
cian to a married lady — not his own wife — which had been inad- 
vertently enclosed in an envelope addressed to this correspondent, 
while the letter to the correspondent had been enclosed in the en- 
velope addressed to the lady. I stated the facts to Mr. Burrows, 
and they were verbally repeated b}- the statistician referred to ; but 
it made no difference to Mr. Burrows, who thought that the corre- 
spondent might possibly " rope in " a straggling vote, which would 
turn the tide in his favor. The caucus met, and Mr. Burrows had the 
solid Michigan delegation — largely under compulsion — and a lone, 
lorn carpet-bag member from Virginia, from Gen. Mahone's district, 
a very respectable gentleman by the way, but under obligations to 
ex-8enator Mahone, who had " assisted " Mr. Burrows in some of 
his previous campaigns. In fact, the list of gentlemen who have 
"assisted" Mr. Burrows during his political campaigns is considera- 
ble — about twenty-five, to my personal knowledge — all of whom had 
interests pending before Congress, notably Gen. Mahone, who was 
anxious to sell a square of ground for a public printing office, to 
which measure Mr. Burrows was pledged, and yet when the time 
came to vote, Mr. Burrows walked out of the hall and loft his friend, 
Gen. Mahone, in the lurcli, although the Senate bill was defeated 
by only a dozen or so majority. Even the " pie-eating " Mr. Brewer 
has repeatedly admitted — particularly since he failed to get the Mon- 
treal consulate — that personally he thought it unwise for Mr. Bur- 
rows to run for Speaker while General Cutcheon was more than 
reluctant to vote for him, and oidy consented at the last to do so 
upon the most earnest and pleading statement and assurance that 
he positively had ten additional votes on the first and ten more on 
the second ballot. Fortunately for the country, the second ballot 
elected Mr. Reed, with the happy result of making Major Mc- 



100 

Kinley Chairman of Ways and Means, resulting in the wise and 
beneficent tariff act of October 1, 1890, prudent and judicious ap- 
propriations under Chairman Cannon, and finally a sweeping reform 
in the rules and parliamentary practice of the House of Representa- 
tives, in which last reform, I may say without egotism, I assisted, as 
the press of the day stated. 

Imagine the consequences of having Julius Cnesar Burrows as 
Speaker of that House, with its slender majority, and the vast re- 
sponsibility resting on that oflicer during that trying period. Think 
of what the country and the Republican party escaped ! 



SENATOR BURROWS AND PRIVATE SECRETARY 
RX)SE IN THE ROLE OF " SCALPERS." 



The Victim is Capt. Alfred Pew, of Grand Rapids, Messenger 
of Senator Burrows' Committee, Who is Monthly Robbed of 
Thirty-five Dollars to Help Entertain Senator Burrows' 
Guests. — Capt. Pew's Salary is $1,440, but he Actually Gets 
but $1,000 per Annum. — Shameful Robbery of a G. A. R. 
Veteran. 



An astounding thing has just been developed in Washington 
through the Department of the Potomac, G. A. R., by the action of 
its Commander, Arthur Hendricks, of the Treasury Department, and 
will, M'ith other cases, be made public as soon as Congress con- 
venes. 

During the Harrison administration, Capt. Alfred Pew, of the old 
Third Michigan Infantry, a resident of Grand Rapids, was appointed 
to a $720 ])lace in the Pension Office. During Grover Cleveland's 
second term, under the reform (?) administration of Hoke Smith, 
Secretary of the Interior, Capt. Pew was dismissed. He sought 
employment everywhere, and was promised (of course) a position in 
the Senate by Senator Burrows, the " hog combine " having dis- 
posed of everything in the House of Representatives. After a long 
and weary delay, Capt. Pew, on April 1, 1896, was appointed to 
a thousand-dollar place in the Senate, and assigned to duty as mes- 
senger to take care of Senator Burrows' committee room. Revision 
of the Laws (which committee has never met, no business ever hav- 
ing been referred to it), on July 1 following being ])romoted to a 
SI, 440 place witii the same duties. 

When ('apt. Pew received his first mouth's sahiry, at the rate of 
11,440 per annum, he had been out of office some time and expended 
every dollar in paying debts. The following day " Private Secre- 



101 

tary " Rose notified Capt. Pew tliat he should have handed him 
(Rose) thirty-five dolhirs out of his salary, as that was the under- 
standing under which he was appointed, he having said to Senator 
Burrows that he would be satisfied with a thousand-dollar place. 
Capt. Pew having spent the entire month's salary, as stated, was 
obliged to ask the grace of Mr. Henrj- M. Rose, clerk of the Com- 
mittee on the Revision of the Laws (which never meets, etc.), and 
was allowed time in which to make up the said amount ($35). He 
soon squared himself up, and from that time until the present date 
has regularly drawn his salary at the rate of $1,440 per annum, and 
as regularly turned over to " Private Secretary " Rose each month 
the sum of thirty-five dollars, in accordance with the demand of Mr. 
Rose, the said sum being used — acoordiug to Mr. Rose — to entertain 
Mr. Burrows' guests from Michigan. 

Think of such an outrage being perpetrated on behalf of a man who 
has become rich through the grace and favor of the Blodgetts and 
lobbyist " Nat " McKay, and who, to-day, instead of being the poor 
man that he represents himself to be, is easily worth one hundred 
thousand dollars ! The paragraphs which have been peddled out 
by " Private Secretary " Rose to the faithful Burrows papers, and 
sent out through his literary bureau, about Senator Burrows' 
poverty are simply rotten and rank falsehoods. I have long known 
of his investments, and if an opportunity is afforded me to go before 
a committee of the Michigan legislature, I will show that committee 
beyond all peradventure that a large proportion of Senator Bur- 
rows' recently acquired wealth was obtained through speculations, 
while it stands to reason that the Blodgetts and lobbyist " Nat " 
McKay have been liberal contributors to his bank account. 

More than two years ago Capt. Pew's wife, tired of being pinched 
on a salary of one thousand dollars a year, which her husband 
received when he was entitled to fourteen hundred and forty, the 
regular salary of his office — addressed a letter to Mr. Rose saying 
that, as her husband had gone home at considerable expense to 
help in the election of 1896, she hoped that he would thereafter be 
allowed his full salary which he was entitled to draw and which he 
as fully earned as did Mr, Rose his salary of eighteen hundred 
dollars per annum, working less than nine months each year. To 
this letter Mr. Rose responded that there was a distinct uuderstand- 
inu" between the Senator and her husband that he was to receive 
one thousand dollars per annum and that the excess of that amount 
was merely a contribution to pay his (Rose's) bills for entertaining 
Senator Burrows' guests from Michigan under the theory of being 
political expenses. 

I have known most of these facts for the last eight months, and 
have stated them to friends in Michigan, saying that the matter should 
be kept quiet until a thorough investigation could be made. Iliave 
never met Capt. Pew, and, at the request of his mauy Michigan 
friends, who feared that an exposure of this scoundrelly performance 
of " Private Secretary " Rose would cause Capt. Pew to lose his 
position, I have refrained from making it public until now. I have 



102 

related the facts to several prominent Republican Senators, who 
have assured me that Capt. Pew shall not lose his office, even in 
the (improbable) event of Senator Burrows' re-election. Senator 
Foraker, to whom I related the fact, was furious, and stated tliat if 
this were true Senator Burrows' clerk should be dismissed from 
office and the Senator and clerk required to refund to Capt. Pew the 
money which they had improperly received from him. "Think," 
said Senator Foraker in the most indignant manner, " of a veteran 
soldier being treated in this shameful way under the guise of enter- 
taining a Senator's friends (?). It is simply infamous, and I hope 
you will expose it and all other similar cases." 

On the 27th instant I addressed a letter to Arthur Hendricks, 
Commander of the Department of the Potomac, Grand Army of the 
Republic, calling his attention to the fact that members of the Grand 
Army, employed at the Capitol^ — one member of my own post (Kit 
Carson) — were being " assessed " monthly by officials and sub-offi- 
cials of the two houses of Congress, and stating a particular in- 
stance. To that letter I have received the following reply : 

" Department of the Potomac, 

"Grand Army of the Republic, 
"Washington, D. C, Decemher 11th, 1898. 
" Henry H. Smith, Esq. 

" Dear Sir AND Comrade : lam in receipt of your favor of this 
date, wherein you state that you have been informed that ' membei-s 
of the G. A. R. (employed at the Capitol) were being defrauded out 
of a portion of their salaries through the action of subordinate 
officials of Congress,' and that in one instance ' a messenger 
(assistant doorkee])er) was on the roll at the rate of $1,440 per 
annum, and was paid at tliat rate monthly, but was required by the 
clerk of the committee to which he was assigned, to turn over the 
difference each month between the sum of si, 000 per annum and 
^1,440 per annum, the amount of his annual compensation,' and 
that * this was under compulsion.' 

" In view of the fact that members of our order are suffering from 
this unfair and unjust act, and are thereby deprived of a portion of 
their livelihood, it would seem that some effort should be made to 
put a stop to a proceeding which diverts a portion of the amounts 
appropriated for their .salaries, from legitimate channels, and places 
a hardship upon those whose services to their country have been 
such as to deserve better treatment. 

" May I trouble you to make an investigation into these matters 
as speedily as possible, and report thereon, in order that the Council 
of Administration of this Department of the G. A. R. can receive 
such infoniuitiou as will enable it to advise the Department Com- 
mander as to the steps to l)e taken whereb}' redress may be afforded 
to these comrades of whom you have written. 
"Yours, in F., C, and L., 

"ARTHUR HENDRICKS, 
^' Departiiiod Coiiitnandery 



103 

I thereupon set on foot inquiries and have ascertained, among 
other cases, the facts above stated, all of which are known, and have 
been for more than two years past, to at least four Michigan soldiers 
employed in the Government service in this city. I have also 
learned of other departmental cases which are not material to this 
issue, and it shall be my duty, as well as my pleasure, to draw a 
bill for presentation in each house of Congress after the holiday 
recess, making this sort of business a penal offence, if it is not 
already under the statute. My own impression — and such is also 
the belief of the United States attorney for the District of Columbia — 
is that there is a law on the statute book now which will reach Mr. 
Henry M. Rose, if not the chairman of the Committee on the Revis- 
ion of the Laws, which never meets, etc., to wit: Julius Coesar 
Burrows, of Kalamazoo, the junior Senator from Micliigan. Shades 
of Woodbridge, Cass, Stuart, Chandler, Howard, Christiancy, Bald- 
win, Conger, and Stockbridge, think of such a contemptible petty 
larcen}' performance as this, and weep ! 

In this connection it is proj^er to call attention to the fact that 
with the exception of three days in June last, when "Private Secre- 
tary " Henry M. Rose did Washington the honor to make it a visit, 
he has been absent from his post of duty since February 10 last, 
drawing a salary at the rate of eighteen hundred dollars per 
annum, upon a voucher duly signed by Julius Cnesar Burrows as 
chairman of the Committee on the Revision of the Laws, certifying 
that Mr. Rose has duly discharged and performed the duties of clerk 
to the Senate Committee on the Revision of the Laws, which has 
never met since lie became its chairman, for the reason that it has 
never had a bill, petition, resolution or other paper referred to it. 
I wait with bated breath to hear the explanation of " Private 
Secretary" Henry M. Rose, manager in the present Senatorial 
campaign of Julius Caesar Burrows, of this nasty piece of business 
in the form of " scalping " the messenger of his committee — a veteran 
soldier — out of $35 per month for over two years! 



MORE PROOF OF PAYMENTS OF BURROWS' CAM- 
PAIGN EXPENSES BY "NAT" McKAY. 



On Thursday, November 24 last, while riding in an F street car 
to the Capitol, I met a gentleman, a former ofiicer of the House 
years ago, and later a prominent official in the Navy Department 
under Secretary Whitne}'. This gentleman asked me as to the Sen- 
atorial contest in Michigan, saying that he had just left "Nat" Mc- 
Kay, who told him that Burrows would win, as he had recentlj^come 
from Michigan and knew that Burrows was " fixed." This sjentleman 



104 

furtlier stated that McKay told liim that he had " put np " liberally 
for Burrows before, aud had just sent him a thousand dollars. We 
had further conversation about McKay, when he made the following 
remark : 

"I was at his house and was shown through his gorgeous 'ban- 
quet hall,' and afterwards through the ' Dewey,' the hotel he is 
building. I asked him if it paid him to entertain so lavishly, saying 
that it must cost him a good deal of money. 

" ' Yes,' replied McKaj-, ' this thing comes high, but I have to have 
these fellows' votes.' 

" 'Are you not afraid some of them will go back on you when you 
want them badly ? ' 

" ' No,' replied McKay, ' every man who comes to my dinners will 
dance for me whenever I call him.' " 

This gentleman added: " McKay is a shrewd, keen, but coarse 
fellow, and I am amazed that some of these members don't kick at 
the way he boasts about his power. He has repeatedly told me the 
names of at least a dozen members of Congress whom he has paid 
for their votes and services." And when I told this gentleman of 
his statement, made at his own table at a dinner party, that out of 
the SI 15,000 which the Court of Claims awarded him, he only saved 
$44,000 for iiimself, giving up the rest in order to put the bill 
through Congress, get as big an allowance as possible from the Navy 
Department, and as large a judgment as possible from the Court of 
Claims, he replied : " He has told me the same thing, and also that 
he paid every Democratic member but one who voted for his bill in 
the Fifty-tirst Congress, and also had to pay some Republican mem- 
bers for their votes." 

I shall be very glad to give the name of this gentleman to any 
committee of investigation which the Michigan legislature may ap- 
point to inquire into the truth or falsity of this statement. 



McKAY S STRENUOUS EFFORTS TO STOP MY MAKING 
PUBLIC CERTAIN FACTS ABOUT, AND LETTERS 
OF, JULIUS CiESAR BURROWS AND OTHERS. 



Commencing last spring, Mr. John S. Blair, the attorney of lobby- 
ist "Nat" McKay, whose office is in the same building whine mine 
is located, has steadily and persistently, until within tiie last six 
weeks, endeavored to ]>ersuade me to " let up " — as he phrased it — 
on Senator Burrows and come to an understanding with him. On 
one occasion Mr. Blair said tome: "'Nat' McKay is a natural 
money maker. He is getting rich rapidly and will become very 
wealthy. He has a great many influential friends in Congress, as 



105 

you can see by the lists of guests at Lis dinuers, and they include 
also the cream of the Departments wherever McKay has business. 
Now, T want to get you and McKay together so that you will stop 
your fighting and make money. You can help each other, and I 
will be very glad to bring you together at any time which will suit 
your convenience." I told Mr. Blair that I never could have any 
agreement whatever with McKay as to the claims business ; that I 
was not engaged in that line of business, and that as Mr. McKay 
had not kept his word with me in years past, but had deliberately 
quarreled with me in 1894, taking my fight against Burrows as a 
pretext to refuse to pay me what he had agreed to for services ren- 
dered in the past, I would make no bargain with him whatever. 
Mr. Blair pressed me all through the spring to meet Mr. McKay 
which I steadily refused to do. I had been employed by Mr. McKay 
to accomplish an amendment to the rules of the House which Mr. 
McKay desired, and had received a retainer for that service. In 
September, after Mr. McKay's return from Michigan, he renewed 
his attempts to stop my warfare on Senator Burrows, and on Sept. 
14 last, called at my ofiice to further urge a reconciliation with 
Mr. McKay. I was occupied with a client, and accepted Mr. Blair's 
invitation to later go to his room. What occurred is told by the 
following memorandum, which I dictated to my stenographer im- 
mediately after leaving Mr. Blair's room on that day: 

" Mr. Blair first accosted me at the entrance of the Kellogg Building 
and said that he had called at my office twice during the day but I 
was absent each time ; that he had a letter from Mr. McKay, and 
he desired to have a further conference with me and would come to 
my room. 

" I went to my office and signed some letters, and, after waiting 
awhile, went to Mr. Blair's office on the upper floor, as I was anxious 
to get home at once. Mr. Blair locked the doors and opened the 
conversation by saying that he had a letter from Mr. McKay from 
Michigan, and that he (McKay) was very anxious to bring about 
amicable relations between Mr. Burrows and myself; that Mr. 
McKay was a warm friend of Mr. Burrows and deeply interested in 
his election ; that he (Blair) was also a friend of Burrows, and also 
desired his election ; that Senator Burrows had been very useful to 
them in supporting their claims, and that both McKay and himself 
had claims pending in the ' omnibus bill ' and otherwise, involving 
a great deal of money, and that Mr. Burrows could render them 
very great service ; that I had said in a previous conversation that 
I was only making a living, but I could not make any compromise 
with Mr. Burrows or Mr. McKay ; that Mr. McKay owed me 
money for services rendered during a period of several years, and 
that he had refused to pay sums of money due me which he had 
repeatedly promised, and that I would have no further dealings 
with him ; that he recently promised to pay the sums due me and 
had treated me insolentl}^, and that 1 had therefore withdrawn all 
claims upon him and notified him that I would do what I should 
have done before, expose his jobbery and robbery in the matter of 



106 

cliiims ap;ainst the Government. Mr. Blair laughed at my heat and 
indignation about the matter and said : ' You need money as well 
as the rest of us, and you might as well join in against the Govern- 
ment as we do. McKay can put it in your way to make plenty of 
money, and is willing to do whatever you sa}' to stop your raid on 
Senator Burrows, and, as a friend of yours, I want to bring about 
amicable relations. I want you to accept this present from me and 
stop attacking Mr. Burrows until you can see Mr. McKay. He will 
be here on Saturday or Sunday, and I want to bring you together.' 
I replied that I would never stop attacking and exposing Mr. 
Burrows while I live ; that I regarded him as a corrupt scoundrel 
who should be behind the bars ; that so far as Mr. McKa}' was con- 
cerned, if he would pay me tlie money he owed me, I would be 
through with him, except when called before a committee or court 
to testify as to the facts touching his claims and record. 

" Having refused to come to any agreement in the previous inter- 
view, I had consulted friends and had been advised to accept any 
tender that Mr. Blair might make in the future and seal it up with 
a statement of the case, which I have done. 

" HENRY H. SMITH. 

" Sept. 17, 1898." 



On Friday, December oOth, at 1.30 P. M., I called at the Riggs 
National Bank, in company with Mr. George E. Miller, the Wash- 
ington correspondent of the Detroit Neios and Tribune. I asked 
for the letter or envelope containing one hundred dollars and the 
memorandum signed by myself which I left with Mr. James M. 
Johnson, vice-president of the bank, as a special deposit on Sep- 
tember 17, 1898, with the understanding, indorsed on the envelope, 
that it was to be opened in the presence of Mr. Charles C. Glover, 
president of the bank, or by Mr. Johson. Mr. Johnson being 
absent, the envelope was opened by Mr. Glover, who counted the 
money and said that there was one hundred dollars within and who 
read aloud the foregoing memorandum of conversation, etc. Mr. 
Miller placed his initials upon the original, which I still have. The 
suggestion of Mr. Blair was that on the return of Mr. McKay from 
Michigan he would pay me one thousand dollars if I would agree 
to make no further fight on Mr. Burrows, and, as stated, Mr. 
McKay called repeatedly and inquired of the elevator boy if I was 
in, saying that he desired to see me and to have me come to his 
house, which I refused to do. 

Acting under the advice of a distinguished lawyer, well known to 
the country, whom I had consulted some time before, 1 received 
from Mr. Blair this money and enclosed it with tlie memorandum in 
an envelope, which I securely sealed and deposited in the Riggs 
National Bank of this city. 

The atten)|)ts to bring about an understanding with Mr. Burrows 
were not confined to Mr. Blair, for on at least three occasions Mr. 
McKay called and inquired of the elevator boy if I were in, leaving 
word that he desired to see mo. I had some conversation and cor- 



107 

respondence with Mr. McKay in respect to his payment of the 
balance due me for services rendered years ago in the collection and 
compilation of statistics relating to the construction of iron-clads, 
not relating to his bill, but to the general bill which authorized all 
claims for the construction of iron-clad vessels of war of all de- 
scriptions to be sent to the Court of Claims for hearing and award. 
Mr. McKay was employed by the different contractors or claimants 
as their agent or attorney in Washington, and I put in many a 
weary day compiling statistics and data on the subject. 

Finding that I turned a deaf ear to all the appeals of Mr. Blair, 
they sought to reach me in another way. Letters were written b}^ 
Senator Burrows to Representative Charles H. Grosvenor, of Ohio, 
and to Judge A. C. Thompson, of the same State, then Chairman of 
the Commission to Revise and Codify the Criminal and Penal Laws 
of the United States, whose office was in the same building as mine, 
stating that I was making trouble and asking them to see me and 
stop my " crusade " against him. I met Judge Thompson, who was 
a member of the Fifty-first Congress and my warm personal friend, 
on September 18, near my office. He had just been appointed U. S. 
District Judge for the Southern District of Ohio, at Cincinnati, and 
was to leave on the following day for that city. I had also arranged 
to leave by the same route but by a different train. Judge Thompson 
stated that he had just come from the White House and that the 
President was disturbed over the situation in Michigan, saying that 
the Republicans could ill afford to lose a Senator just now, and that 
from information received from Senator Burrows and others, it 
looked as though Gov. Pingree would capture the Senatorship, and, 
as a result, make the administration a great deal of trouble after 
March 4th next. I told Judge Thompson that such talk was 
nonsense ; that Gov. Pingree had no thought of being a candidate for 
Senator ; that he was running for Governor and nothing else, and 
that while I believed that Mr. Burrows would be defeated, it was 
absolutely certain that as good a RepuV)lican as himself or Gen. 
Grosvenor, or even the President, would be sent to the Senate as 
Mr. Burrows' successor. Judge Thompson invited me to his room, 
which was directly under my office, and we continued the conversa- 
tion. He had indorsed me earnestly, as had Gen, Grosvenor, for an 
appointment as member of the Industrial Commission, as shown 
by the following paper. 

Oct. 20th, 1898. 
Hon. Chahles H. Grosvenor, 

Athens, Ohio. 
Dear General : — About noon to-day I received a telephone mes- 
sage from First Assistant Postmaster-General Perry Heath asking 
me to call at his office about a personal matter. I did so in 
the afternoon, when he told me the substance of a joint letter, signed 
by yourself and Judge Thompson, in regard to the political situation 
in Michigan, especially relating to the " feud " between Senator 
Julius CcTesar Burrows and mj'self. Mr. Heath stated that the 



108 

situation in Michigan was very grave; that Mr. Barrows had written 
that the tight I was making on him endangered his re-election and 
requesting that something be done towards placating me and stop- 
ping my attacks upon him. 

Mr. Heath stated that the letter— which he presumed was dictated 
b}' you — required as a condition of your joint indorsement of my 
application for Secretary of the Industrial Commission that I should 
withdraw the charges I iuid made against Senator Burrows and agree 
to make no further attacks or tight upon him. I was very greatly 
amazed at this request, which 1 very promptly and indignantly 
refused to agree to. 1 am still more amazed that you should seri- 
oush' ask me to debase or degrade myself by withdrawing charges 
against this dirty scoundrel — all of which are supported by proof 
from public records. I had supposed that you thought better of me 
than that, especially after your very cordial indorsement of June 
18th last of my application for membership of the Industrial Com- 
mission. There was no condition whatever imposed on that 
occasion, and there should be none now. If the service which I 
rendered Major McKiuley at the St. Louis convention, which you 
then certified to, was so valuable then, it has not changed in its 
character, and I would sooner sweep np garbage on Pennsylvania 
Avenue than agree to an}' such condition. I am not a seedy or 
needy applicant for office. I am making a living, and shall continue 
to do so after this scurvy cur Burrows has. been retired from public 
life on the 4th of March next, as he surely will be. 

I have been treated very shabbily in this whole business, and I 
do not propose to tamely submit to it. I understand and am 
entirely satisfied with the course of the President in not appointing 
me as a member of the commission without the indorsement of at 
least one Senator from my State, though the House delegation — 
save two — had indorsed my application. I had received the indoi'se- 
ment of all the leading Republicans of the Senate and House, and 
had tlie support of at least four members of the Cabinet ; and for 
you now to ask me to recant and withdraw the statements I have made 
respecting Senator Burrows, and thus write myself down a liar and 
a fool, is something I never expected of you. 

During your entire membership of the House of Representatives 
I have, from time to time, rendered you valuable service, I think 
the letter I wrote you in answer to your inquir}' about " committee 
primacy," when you thought Mr. Reed was going to treat you badly, 
was of some service to you ; likewise other matters I have looked 
up and dug out for you from the records of the musty past. 

S(!nator Burrows will be defeated in a Republican caucus, as he 
ought to be. He is a hypocrite, a demagogue, a liar, and venal. 
In Oct., liS'.)5, he was interviewed at Niles, Mich., and said he was 
for McKinley. Three days later, after reaching home, and finding 
a letter from Senator Quay suggesting that he might be availal)le as 
a candidati! for Vice-President, he repudiated /// tola the Niles in- 
terview published in the Tribune and stated that the fight was still 
open and that tlie probabilities were that an Eastern man would be 



109 

nominated. Some time later the Chicago Trihune published an 
alleged Washington despatch — coming from the " anti-McKinley 
combine " — patting Burrows forward as a candidate for Vice-Presi- 
dent, hoping to draw oft' Michigan delegates from McKiuley. Bur- 
rows put his ear to the ground and listened. Not a leaf stirred ! 
What is the use of trying to bolster up such a fraud as this 
creature Burrows is ? He has no standing or character in the Sen- 
ate ; nobody cares a damn about his opinion on any question, and I 
suppose his re-election is desired principally by the two-dollar lum- 
ber ring, " Nat " McKay and Senator Hanna, as I observe by an 
authorized interview given out by Senator Hanna on the 12th in- 
stant that Senator Hanna says he proposes to " assist " Mr. Bur- 
rows, althou.ih the President is taking no part whatever in the con- 
test. I notice that Senator Hanna is not " assisting" Senator Quay 
in the least, while Postmaster-General Smith is very earnestly " as- 
sisting" to put Mr. Quay out of the Senate. 

I am a candidate for the place of secretary to the Industrial 
Commission on my record and merits. I have the strongest indorse- 
ment for member.ihip of that commission, lohich ought to hold good 
for appnintment os secretary^ though, as a matter of fact, the secre- 
tary should be a man equal in ability and superior in experience to 
the members oi the commission. My application will be presented 
to the commission when they meet here next mouth, and I shall file, 
with other letters and recommendations, a copy of the indorsement 
made by Judge Thompson and yourself. 

I am quite sure that you will agree, on reflection, that your de- 
mand that I should withdraw the charges I had made against Sena- 
tor Burrows — all of which have been sustained by public and pri- 
vate proof — and that I forbear making any further attack upon him, 
should never have been made. The Michigan legislature will send 
as his successor as good a Kepublican as yourself or President 
McKinley. He will be a man of integrity, ability and character, 
and not a man of the stamp of this venal creature, Julius Caesar 
Barrows. 

I have written Judge Thompson, who said to me on the C. k O. 
train to Cincinnati on the 19th ultimo, that if Burrows had trea ed 
me as I stated — which he did not doubt — I was fully justified in 
attacking him. Would you, after having attacked, openly, a polit- 
ical or personal enemy, giving figures and facts which could not be 
questioned, turn about, like a crab or crawfish, and withdraw them, 
and give a clean bill of health^ — political or otherwise — to the person 
you had thus assailed? I think not. You have been a pretty 
square and vigorous fighter, and I have always admired you for it, 
for I am that kind of a man myself, and I would see the Republican 
or any party a million miles in hades before I woultl think of 
withdrawing a single charge I have made against this man Burrows. 
That is all I have to say about the matter. 

Very truly yours, 

HENEY H. SMITH. 



110 

I wfis not appointed, because Senator Bnrrows liad first selected 
Mr. Frank "Wuite, of Sturjj;is, who it seems talked himself out of the 
place, and then, upon the earnest appeal of Mr William Ahleu 
Smith, Mr. E. D. Conger, editor of the Grand Rapids Ileruhl , was 
chosen. Judge Thompson expressed his earnest desire, in which 
he said Gen. Grosvenor concurred, to see me have a nice po- 
sition, to which I was fully entitled at tlie hands of this administra- 
tion. He thereupon said : "I think there is one bureau office filled 
by a Democrat. It is a good place and would suit you. If you 
will stop your fight on Burrows, Grosvenor and I will present the 
matter to the President and get you appointed. The President 
wants to do something for you. I know, and if you will stop this 
fight it is as good as settled." I did not care two raps about the 
place — as my friends here know — but I wanted to make the record 
complete, and have done so. 

I told Judge Thompson that I would not agree to stop my fight 
on Mr. Burrows, as he had been guilty of the grossest treachery to 
me, had fought me as bitterly as I had him, and had tried to injure 
me in every possible way, and that the only thing I would agree to 
do was to talk with the President, inform hira of the situation in 
Michigan, and be governed by his advice. It was agreed that we 
should talk the subject over the next day, and I tried to make tht; 
afternoon train in order to join Judge Thompson, but failed, and we 
tcok the midnight train on the C. k O. I was surprised to meet the 
Judge on the train, and we had further conversation the next day 
until we reached his home at Portsmouth, Ohio. After giving him 
a pretty full history of Mr. Burrows' career, Judge Thompson said 
to me: "I don't blame you in the least for feeling as you do, and 
will write Grosvenor, and we will fix this thing up for you anyway." 

On my return from the West I received a telephone message from 
Assistant Postmaster-General Heath, asking me to call at his office 
at my earliest convenience. I could not call until during the after- 
noon. What occurred is elsewhere stated, with the exception of the 
remark that General Heath said he had no personal interest in Bur- 
rows' election but was acting for General Grosvenor and Judge 
Thompson, who were exceedingly anxious, as w^as ':he President and 
Senator Hanna, that a Re])ul)lican Senator should be elected from 
Michigan, and, second, that Governor Pingree sl)ould not be chosen. 

'I'owards the end of Novend)er, as a matter of "dc^vilment," I called 
Assistant Postmaster-General Heath up one day on the tele])hone, 
and asked him to fix a day when I could talk with him about another 
matter, and incidentally mentioned this subj(>ct. The following 
memorandum of that conversation was dictated to my stenogi'apher 
and written out by liim immediately after r(>turning to my office. 

" I asked Mr. Heath if lie had received any re])ly from either Judge 
Thompson or General Grosvenor to his letter of last month, in re- 
sponse to their letter requesting him to see me and secure a pledge 
from me to stop my fight on Burrows. Mr. Heath ic^plied that he 
had no letter and supposed the matter was dropped, as I was un- 
willing to withdraw the charges I had made against Burrows, or in 



Ill 

the least degree 'let up' on him. Mr. Heath further said that he 
understood that Messrs. Grosvenor and Thompson took less interest 
in behalf of Burrows now than at first, in consequence of the large 
Republican majority in the Senate, and he (Heath) was satisfied that 
the President took no interest whatever in Burrows' candidacy. All 
the President wants is a good Republican, and that is certain. 

" I told Mr, Heath that I purposed making a statement of the facts, 
and of the attempts of Grosvenor and Thompson to stop me from 
making any further attack on Burrows, and generally to expose his 
rotten record as a matter of public duty. 

" To this he replied : ' I have no interest in the matter whatever, 
and do not think the President cares a snap about it. So you must 
exercise your own judgment in the matter, and do whatever you 
think best about it.' " 

[Note. — I will add that scores of prominent Republicans to whom 
I have talked about this matter, and Burrows' record generally, have 
said it was my duty to the Republican party to expose him.] 



EX-SENATOR THOMAS W. PALMER THREATENS TO 
KNOCK OUT' JULIUS CiESAR BURROWS FOR 
RE-ELECTION TO THE SENATE IF HE DOESN T 
VOTE FOR A TWO-DOLLAR RATE ON LUMBER. 
THE SENATOR 'DEAD SURE' THAT HE AND 
JOHNNY BLODGETT HAVE GOT A "MORTAL 
CINCH ' ON BURROWS. 



On Thursday, April 1, 1897, ex-Senator Palmer arrived at the 
Ebbitt House in Washington about four o'clock P. M. I met Mr. 
Palmer at the Fourteenth Street entrance to the Ebbitt and was 
invited to go to his room, the Senator saying that he specially 
wanted to talk with me about the Dingley tariff bill, which had 
passed the House the day before. Mr. Palmer did not register, but 
was shown directly to his room, for which he had wired. While 
removing the dust of travel and sipping a " gin fizz," the Senator 
made various inquiries of me as to the character of the tariff bill 
and what I thought the Senate would do with it. I replied that, 
as usual, the Senate would rip it all up and make five or six hundred 
amendments, but that this time the Senate would not have its way 
as it had in the tariff bill of 1883, and especiallv with that of 1894. 

He then asked me what I thought of the lumber schedule. I 
replied briefly, stating my views in regard to the matter, saying that 
I believed the outcome would be a dollar rate. Thereupon the 
Senator quickly asked, " Where do you place Burrows in this fight 



112 

between the dollar and two-dollar lumber people ? " To this I 
replied that while Burrows would naturally go with the Blodgetts if 
he dared, I thought the pressure would be so strong that he would 
be compelled to vote with Senator McMillan for a dollar rate. With 
great vehemence, the Senator snapped out, " He doesn't dare vote 
for the dollar rate ! If he does, the Journal will ' knock him out.' " 
The Senator repeated this with still more vehemence, and ordered 
another " gin fizz," telling the waiter to make it extra strong. By 
that time the Senator had made his toilet and came over to where 
I was sitting, and, shaking his finger, with great solemnity, said : 
"Harry Smith, the Journal made Julius CtBsar Burrows Senator, 
and if he breaks his pledge and votes for the dollar rate, mark 
my word, the Journal will 'knock him out' to a dead certainty." 
To that I replied tlxat I sincerely hoped he would vote for the dollar 
rate, for I thought he had disgraced the State of Michigan long 
enough and ought to be "knocked out." After some further talk on 
that line, I said that the general impression was that the Ijlodgetts, 
Sam Stephenson, and lolibyist "Nat" McKay elected Burrows. 
" Well," said Mr. Palmer, " they helped, but the Journal sowed the 
seed or laid the foundation and pulled him through. I know as well 
as you that Burrows is slippery, but he doesn't dare bolt the track 
this time, for if he does, he is a ' gone goose.' " Then the Senator 
said that his trip to Washington was partly to see the jMichigau 
Senators and do what he could toward getting Mr. Burrows on the 
Finance Committee to fill the vacancy made by Senator Sherman's 
resignation. I told the Senator that Mr. Burrows would not get on 
the Finance Committee if the truth was told about him, and in any 
event would not get there until the bill was reported to the Senate, 
which would not be for a month or six weeks. 

Subsequently I heard about conferences Mr. Palmer had with the 
Michigan and other Senators, and I found also that he arrived in 
good time; to attend a conference of gentlemen from Minnesota, Wis- 
consin, jNIichigan, and elsewhere interested in the two-dollar rate. 
I also learned that he had made to others the same threats about 
"knocking out" Julius Caesar Burrows if he did not h'ep h'tK pledge 
to vote for the two-dollar rate. 

From tiiis it appears that prior to his election to the Senate in 
January, iKDo, Mr. Burrows had ple<lged himself, as Mr. Schuyler 
S. Olds, in a letter written me from Harl)or Springs in August, 181)7, 
says, "knee deep to the Blodgetts." Mr. Olds further said, in a 
pungent paragraph, "Burrows sold himself, body and soul, to the 
l>lodgetts, and tliey nominated in the bond, before they put up a 
dollar to buy his election, that he should vote for the two-dt)llar rate 
on lumb(!r." This is a slight digression, to l)e sure, but it seems 
appropriate. 

I have Mr, Olds' letter before me, and I will give another extract. 
Referring to the money raised by the Blodgetts, Stephenson, lobbyist 
McKay, and others to buy the Wayne county delegation and other 
scattering votes which were for sale, Mr. Olds pointedly remarks : 
" Secretary Alger could tell a story that would damn P>urrows to 



113 

eternal infamy, if he were not in the Cabinet ; but the facts will all 
come out in time." " In addition to the money paid by these 
people, Burrows ' fried the fat ' out of several manufacturers, and I 
hope to be able to get permission from a gentleman in Chicago 
to publish Burrows' letter soliciting contributions toward securing 
his election to the Senate. I have a copy of it now, but am not yet 
authorized to use it." Probably no man in Michigan, besides the 
Blodgetts and Burrows, knows as much about the corrupt Senatorial 
campaign of 1894 as Schuyler S. Olds. He was obliged to stand 
still and see at least fifteen votes pledged to him bought from under 
him. In another letter from Harbor Springs he gives me some 
details of that contest, which would be very interesting reading. 
No secrecy or confidence was enjoined, but Mr. Olds wrote precisely 
as he had openly talked about that shameless barter by which four- 
teen votes were bought for Senator Burrows, precisely as Sam 
Stephenson told Mr. Biirrows and " Uncle Jim " Monroe in Chicago, 
in November, 1894, they would have to do. 

I am told that Mr. Stephenson has recently piiblished a letter 
denying the truth of Mr. Britton's dispatch from Washington to the 
Detroit News about the middle of January, 1895, in which he is 
reported as making on the floor of the House the statement I 
have just quoted. I am also told that Mr. Stephenson's letter was 
published in the Journal, and for that reason I missed it. But if it 
l3e true that he makes such denial squarely and fully, he states a 
deliberate falsehood, for it can be proven by fifty men, mostly 
members or ex-members of Congress, that he boasted of this very 
thing to them and repeatedly bragged about his part in this corrupt 
transaction. I dined with Senator and Mrs. Arthur Brown at the 
Ebbitt House, where Mr. Stephenson was also boarding, towards 
the close of the Fifty-fourth Congress. After dinner we sat in the 
parlor, Mr. Stephenson being present ; and without any apparent 
reason or occasion for it, or the slightest hesitation, Mr. Stephenson 
again narrated to the Senator the fact that the Burrows people had 
bought fourteen votes, precisely as he predicted in Chicago, and 
that Burrows' election had cost him (Stephenson) eight thousand 
dollars. Ex-Senator Brown's address is Salt Lake City, Utah, in 
case Mr, Julius Caesar Burrows wants to get a denial of this state- 
ment from him. 

Mr. Britton told the truth, and, being an honorable man, he will 
not go back upon it. He may remain silent, for evident reasons ; 
but there were too many listeners to Stephenson's conversation on 
the floor of the House, which was correctly narrated in the News, 
to permit this belated denial from Mr. Stephenson to have the 
slightest weight or be believed by a single human being except a 
new and very credulous marine. 



114 



JULIUS CESAR BURROWS, AN OFFICE-HOLDER FOR 
OVER A THIRD OF A CENTURY.-HAS DRAWN §100,000 
SALARY AS MEMBER OF CONGRESS, 9;7,'im MILEAGE, 
AND ABOUT $3,000 COMMUTATION OF STATIONERY, 
THE FULL ALLOWANCE BEING OYER $3,800, MR. 
BURROWS USUALLY DRAWING BUT A SMALL 
QUANTITY OF STATIONERY, USING WHAT HE NEEDED 
FROM THE COMMITTEE ALLOWANCE AND GETTING 
MONEY IN LIEU THEREOF. 



It cau be proven that Mr. Burrows has cost the United States 
Government over $110,000, and in view of the fact that for the last 
sixteen years, and particuhirly during the hist ten years, he has had 
his pocket-book crammed with raih'oad passes — annual and trip — 
carrying him all over the country, with steamboat passes to Europe 
and return free of ex])ense, it will be seen that //Mr. Burrows is a 
poor man, as he and Mr. Rose have so sedulously claimed, after the 
frugal and " close " life that he has led, he must have " dropped " a 
good deal of money in stock and other speculations. In addition to 
this, as elsewhere stated, he has received in the neighborhood of 
$25,000 compensation as a campaign " spell-binder," not including 
the five thousand dollars out of which he " buncoed " the national 
Congressional committee in the campaign of 1890, nor the $100 for 
speaking at Lowell in 189G. In addition to these immense sums of 
money Avliich he has received as salary, for mileage, stationery, etc., he 
has been the recipient of thousands of dollars' worth of presents from 
manufacturers, &c., such as furniture, carpets, beautiful dinner sets, 
pictures, vases, and the like — illustrating the protective principle — 
not to mention several thousand dollars' worth of presents which he 
or his family have received, such as jewelry, pictures, etc., from his 
friend, lobbyist " Nat " McKay. All this talk, therefore, of the 
" ])overty " of Senator Julius Cjesar Burrows is not only idle non- 
sense, but rank, rotten falsehood, made and published for efltect, as 
anybody who has access to his residence in Washington and in Kala- 
mazoo will see. The citizens of Kalamazoo who know him best 
are all aware of his penurious habits and his weakness for accept- 
ing presents, and when Committee Clerk Henr}' M. Rose, who has 
been robbing Cajit. Alfred Pew, messenger of the Committee on the 
Revision of the Laws, which has never met, etc., out of thirty-tive 
dollars per mouth since July 1, 189G, puts out this sickening " rot " 
about Burrows' poverty, he issues what he knows to be a deliberate 
falsehood, well kiu)wing it to be such. If there is any way to reach 
the true figure of Senator Burrows' wealth by a "bill of discovery," 
or otherwise, I will organize a syndicate within twenty-four hours 
and pay him one hundred thousand dollars cash, take his assets, and 
make fifty thousand dollars out of the bargain. 



115 

Senator Burrows gets Credit for Secretary Blaine's Eeciprocity 
Speech Before Home Market Club in Boston. 

During the Harrison administration Secretary Blaine was invited 
to address the Home Market Club, of Boston, on the subject of 
Beciprocity. The Secretary prepared an elaborate speech, which 
at the last moment he found he was unable to deliver. He asded 
two or three prominent gentlemen to act as his substitute in the 
matter, promising to turn over his speech to them to deliver ; but by 
reason of important business or other arrangements they were com- 
pelled to decline. Tt then occurred to him that Senator Burrows 
was the only living " Columbian Orator," and he wired Mr. Burrows, 
at the House of Representatives, asking him to fill his engagement, 
repeating his offer to furnish the speech, whicli despatch Mr, 
Burrows showed rne and others. Mr. Burrows gladly accepted and 
read the speech before the Home Market Club with great success, 
for, as everybody knows, Julius Csesar Burrows is an orator. A 
summary of the speech had been prepared by Mr. Blaine's secretary 
and furnished the agents of the Associated and United Press in 
Boston, and likewise copies were mailed to leading papers in New 
York, New England, and other points ; so that all that was necessary 
was to strike out the words " Secretary Blaine " and insert in lieu 
thereof the words " Representative Burrows, of Michigan." I was 
told by a prominent member of the Home Market Club while dining 
with him at the Parker House last spring that he heard Mr. Burrows 
read Secretary Blaine's speech, and subsequently attended a 
banquet given in honor of Mr. Burrows. This gentleman said : 

" I sat very near Mr. Burrows at the dinner, and subsequently 
near him on a sofa, and heard him undertake to talk about reciproc- 
ity, and I soon discovered that he knew as much about the under- 
lying principles of reciprocity and the tariff as a pig does about 
international law." I replied to the remark that this was the way 
in which Mr. Burrows had secured his reputation, upon other 
people's brains ; that nature had endowed him with a line voice and 
an immense amount of gall, and that on these two qualities he had 
got ahead in politics. " Yes," replied this gentleman — a leader in 
Massachusetts politics — " and this is the way the reputations of 
many rural 'statesmen' have been made by Mr. Blaine." 



HON. JAMES H. STONE SELLS OUT HIS INTEREST IN 
THE KALAMAZOO TELEGRAPH BECAUSE HE 
COULD NOT CONSCIENTIOUSLY SUPPORT JULIUS 
C^SAR BURROWS FOR CONGRESS. 



On Wednesday, August 4, 1874, Mr. James H. Stone, now United 
States Appraiser at the Port of Detroit, retired from the half own- 



116 

ersliip of the Kaliimazoo Telegraph, with which he hat! been cou- 
uected as reporter, editor aud half-owner for several years. His 
interest was purchased by a syndicate representing the Burrows 
faction in Kalamazoo through Mr. Lyman H. Gates, then sheriff of 
Kalamazoo County. In retiring from the paper Mr. Stone, in his 
valedictory, said in part as follows : 

" Two years ago when I yielded a reserved support to Mr. Bur- 
rows' nomination, that gentleman had not been tried and found 
worthy or unworthy. The undersigned could not conscientiously 
or consistently with his past editorial utterances indorse the Con- 
gressional record of Mr. Burrows, believing the same to be not only 
in conflict with party principles, but antagonistic to the general 
public interests. Nor did I hold that belief in the integrity and 
capacity of Mr. Burrows that was necessary to permit an indorse- 
ment of him as deserving a re-election to Congress. In view, too, 
of my belief in the existence of a wide-spread dissatisfaction with 
the candidacy of Mr. Burrows throughout the Fourth Congressional 
District, in a greater degree even than two j^ears ago, when Mr. 
Burrows fell largel}- behind his own county, had I regarded that 
gentleman entirely lit to occupy a seat in Congress, in those ' off 
years in politics,' I could not have considered liis nomination as 
either proper or politic. Whether there was any ground for these 
doubts as to his strength and availability as a candidate will appear 
next November." 

The result of the November election fully vindicated the judg- 
ment and wisdom of Mr. Stone. Mr. Burrows, after making a most 
thorough canvass of the district Avith the aid of the strongest speak- 
ers in Michigan, as well as distinguished speakers from outside the 
State, and a large campaign fund behind him, was defeated by an 
overwhelming majority, although the remainder of the Ilepublican 
ticket carried the district handsomel3\ Appraiser Stone knows lots 
of things about " Orator " Burrows. 



SENATOR BURROWS ALWAYS THE PRESIDING OFFICER 
AT LOBBYIST "NAT"McKAY'S BANQUETS. -DRAWS 
AN ACT THAT "NAT" IS A GOOD FELLOW^ AND A 
"JOLLY DOG." 



Hanging in " Nat " McKay's office at his palatial residence on 
Thirteenth street, in Washington, is the following imitation of an 
act of Congress handsomely framed. It was drawn by Julius Ca-sar 
Burrows, who is supposed to be an ex{)ert o\\ everything tsxcept the 
right of the Senate to originate revenue bills. The certificate is as 
follows : 



117 

Be it enacted, etc., 

That Nathaniel McKay, citizen and patriot of the United States 
of America, be, and he hei-eby is, granted long life and a happ}' one 
and that he have perfect good health throughout, and that for the 
purpose of aiding and carrying out the provisions of this act there 
be appropriated to the said Nathaniel McKay our token of respect 
and esteem suitable to his mode aud style of good fellowship, in the 
selection of which we are not entirely unselfish. 

(Signed) JULIUS C. BURROWS, 

And Nineteen Other Patriots. 

Note — The token above referred to is an enormous silver cut- 
glass punch bowl, with heavy silver ladle, costing some five hundred 
dollars. 

It has been repeatedly stated that Senator Burrows has the free- 
dom of McKay's mansion on Thirteenth street. This is the truth, 
and there is hardly a night during the session of Congress, when 
Julius Cfesar Burrows has the leisure, that he doesn't drop around 
to " Nat's " and drink a glass of wine or partake of other refresh- 
ment. Senator Burrows alwa3's tiuds other "jolly good fellows" 
there, aud the capacious wine cellars of " Nat's " are freely drawn 
on by his guests. 

McKay was brought to grief about one of his dinners, which 
would have embarrassed anybody else but a man of his infinite gall. 
He had invited a number of Senators and Representatives to meet 
Senator Hanna, and a considerable number of members, say eight 
or ten Senators aud twenty-five or thirty Representatives, with a 
sprinkling of Department officials who are so situated as to be of 
service to McKay, assembled to meet the Senator from Ohio. But 
Senator Hanna, in whose honor a most gorgeous banquet was given, 
did not appear, and from a publication in the Post of the following 
morning it would seem that he made no excuse for his non-appear- 
ance, althougli it developed later that he spent the evening out at a 
private card party. Mark Hanna has his faults and sins ; but he is 
no spring chicken or raw marine, aud, like his colleague. Senator 
Foraker, was altogether too shrewd to walk into " Nat " McKay's 
spider parlor like an innocent fly. 

At least twenty prominent Senators and Representatives have 
told me that they have fully comprehended the objects of "Nat" 
McKay's banquets and that they always have previous engagements. 
It is to the credit of Vice-President Hobart, Speaker Reed, Senators 
Allison, Aldrich, Chandler, Cullom, Davis, Hale, Lodge, McMillan, 
Morrill, Quay, both Platts, Proctor, Sewell, Spooner, Thurston, 
Wolcott, aud other prominent members of Congress Avho might be 
named that they have never accepted one of " Nat " McKay's invita- 
tions to dinner. 

Mr. McKay once gave a dinner to Senator Hoar, who was his 
attorney in the suit brought iu Boston against the estate of his 
brother Donald, who was the real shipbuilder of the family. " Nat" 



118 

McKay boasts of beiug a." retired sbipl)uilder," but he has never 
built a ship — except an imitation floral ship — since 180G, when he 
built the small steamer " Yi " for the Argentine Government. " Nat " 
McKay failed in 1866, and from that date he has haunted Wash- 
ington, coming here in 1868 poor and living in a cheap boarding- 
house, while to-day he is worth over a million of dollars and in- 
terested in large contracts and claims pending before the Govern- 
ment, which, if half of them succeed, will make make him worth 
two million dollars more within two years. 



The Brule and Ontonagon R.R. Grant. 



VILE TREACHERY OF JULIUS C^SAR BURROWS TO COL. 
FRANCIS B. STOCKBRIDGE, HIS PERSONAL AND 
POLITICAL BENEFACTOR.— BURROWS ASKS STOCK- 
BRIDGE TO KICK HIM FROM ONE END OF MAIN 
STREET TO THE OTHER —" COLUMBIAN ORATOR" 
TRIES TO FIND LIVING ELSEWHERE.— UNABLE TO 
DO SO, RETURNS TO KALAMAZOO AND MAKES 
PEACE WITH STOCKBRIDGE. 



On February 5, 1883 (second session, Forty-seventh Congress), 
Mr. Converse, of Ohio, one of the brainiest and purest members of 
the House, moved to suspend the rules and pass House bill 6735 
to confirm and declare legal the acts of certain officers of the United 
States. The bill and preamble were read, the latter reciting the 
facts in connection with the construction of a railroad from Ontona- 
gon to the Wisconsin State line, under act of June 3, 1856, and 
validated the acts of officers of the Interior Department in issuing 
patents, certificates, and lists of lands, etc. Distinguished counsel 
liad been heard before the Judiciary Committee in support of oppo- 
sition to the bill, with the result that the bill was unanimously 
order<Hl reported, tiie chairman of the subcommittee being Mr. 
Edwin Willits, of Michigan. Their report was ratified by the full 
committee, which reported the bill. Mr. Converse made a state- 
ment of the facts, and was followed by Mr. Horr, of the Saginaw 
district, Avho opposed the bill in the interest of Mr. Ezra Rust, of 
Saginaw, who had large interests in the land in dis])ute. Mr. Horr's 
reckless statements were disputed by nearly all the members of the 
committee, and it was shown by Mr. Manning, of Mississippi, that 



119 

twenty miles of the road were constructed in the dead of winter, 
three miles being on the top of three feet of snow. 

He was followed by Mr. Ezra D. Taylor, of Ohio, the successor 
of Gen. Garfield, and one of the ablest lawyers of the House, who 
further explained the facts, which I have not the space to narrate. 
Mr. Willits, of Michigan, stated that he had voted for the bill in 
the committee, but that he would not now vote to pass it under 
suspension of the rules, although he had no amendment to offer. 
Judge Taylor was followed by ex-Gov. Robinson, of Massachusetts, 
one of the ablest, purest, and clearest-headed men in that Congress, 
who made a very conclusive and convincing statement in regard to 
the bill. 

Senator Burrows had been slated to speak in behalf of the bill. 
At the request of Colonel Francis B. Stockbridge, who was largely 
interested in the passage of the bill, I had assisted Mr. Burrows in 
preparing a short speech in its behalf. Ex-Representative McGowan, 
of Michigan, was one of the attorneys of Colonel Stockbridge, the 
other attorneys being the firm of Britton & Gray, of this city. I 
obtained from Mr. McGowan their brief in the matter, and at Mr. 
Burrows' request made a compact statement of the case. To that 
Mr. Burrows made an addendum in the way of an eloquent appeal 
in behalf of the poor settlers, who, in good faith, had settled on these 
lands, under the authority of the Government of the United States, etc., 
etc. He had it copied by some person and turned it over to me to be 
sent to the editor of the Tribune. To the best of my recollection, Mr. 
Stocking was then its managing editor, as the paper had no regu- 
lar correspondent here. I sent Mr. Burrows' speech, consisting of 
some 11 or 12 pages of foolscap, to Mr. Stocking, with an explana- 
tion of the situation and saying that the moment the bill came up I 
would wire him to have the speech put in type. The motion was 
made by Mr. Converse on Monday, when such motions only were in 
order two days in the month. On the Thursday prior to this mo- 
tion being made Mr. Burrows came to me and said that he had con- 
cluded not to speak on the bill and perhaps would not vote for it, 
and asked me to wire Mr. Stocking for the return of his manuscript, 
which I did at once. I asked Mr. Burrows the reason for his 
" change of base" on this subject, and was told that as Mr. Willits, 
who was chairman of the sub-committee of the Judiciary Committee, 
had changed his mind about it, and as Judge Hubbell and Mr. Horr 
were against the bill, he thought it best to take no chances, as he 
was really not familiar with the suoject or the provisions of the bill. 

During the debate I observed that Messrs. Burrows and Willits, 
as well as Judge Hubbell and Mr. Horr, Avere very busy on the floor 
interviewing members. I asked some members thus interviewed 
what those gentlemen were saying about the bill, and was told that 
they urged, as a suit was pending. Congress should not act, that the 
bill was in the interest of Eastern capitalists, and that sort of thing. 
I did not then know that Mr. Hubbell had promised the vote of the 
Upper Peninsula members in the legislature for Senator respectively 
to Messrs. Burrows and Willits in order to get them to reverse 



120 

themselves, but immediately after adjournment I was told the fact 
The Senatorial contest was then " on " at Lansing, and it was the 
" field against Ferry." Mr. Ferry was for the bill, and for that and 
other satisfactor}' reasons, Judge Hubbell opposed his re-election. 
That night I saw Mr. Barrows at his room and talked with him very 
freely about his conduct in res])ect to this bill. He stated that he 
was going out of Congress, and he voted against the bill, believing 
that it might make him Senator with the votes Mr. Hubbell had 
promised him. I asked him if he did not know that Mr. Hubbell 
had also promised the same votes to Mr. Willits. At first he denied 
having such knowledge, and then admitted it. I was very indignant 
at his course, without having the slightest interest in the bill, and 
said : " I don't see how you can go home and face Col. Stockbridge 
after helping defeat this bill to-day. You owe your election to the 
last and present Congress to him, and this, in my judgment, is the 
end of 30ur political career in Michigan." To this he replied: "I 
know that very well, and I am going to leave the State. I am mak- 
ing arrangements to form a law partnership elsewhere, and, failing 
that, shall go to Dakota, where I will have a chance to come in as 
Senator." Mr. Burrows made some further apology for his conduct 
and vote, but I was too disgusted to listen, and left. 

The next morning I recieived a telegram from Col. Stockbridge 
asking me to write him full particulars of the defeat of the bill and 
send him Record containing the proceedings, which I did. On 
February 111 received a letter from Col. Stockbridge sayiug that 
he had received an apologetic letter from McGowan — one of his 
counsel — explaining the result, which was not satisfactory. " The 
fact of the matter is," said Col. Stockbridge, " McGowan is a ten- 
der-hearted fellow and does not want to say anything harsh about 
Burrows, though I suppose he thinks lie has been pretty severe on 
him." In that letter, which I still have, Col. Stockbridge denounced 
Julius CiTosar Burrows in the most bitter terms. I would print the 
letter but prefer to submit it witli others hereafter. Subsequently 
Mr. Alexander Britton, of the firm of Brittou and Gra}', consulting 
counsel in the case, feeling that Mr. McGowan had not fully pre- 
sented the enormity of Mr. Burrows' shameful conduct, wrote Col. 
Stockbridge at length, a copy of which letter I read and made an 
abstract of, which I still have. I was promised a full copy of the 
letter, which was made, but Mr. Brittou's son and associate per- 
suaded him not to give it out as a matter of precaution. That let- 
ter is in the possession of Schuyler S. Olds, of Lansing, as well as a 
copy furnished Mrs. Stockbridge at my request in December, 1894, 
which was sent by Mrs. Stockbridge to Mr. Olds at Lansing. I 
have Mr. Olds' letter acknowledging its receipt and saying that he 
would furnish me a copy provided I would furnish him a copy of 
another letter, sayiug that he " believed in reciprocity." Mr. Olds 
is in Lansing, I believe, and will speak for himself. 



121 



ODDS AND ENDS. 



THE CORBETT CASE FROM OREGON.— SENATOR BUR- 
ROWS CHANGES HIS VIEWS.— CONTESTANT COR- 
BETT DISAPPOINTED.— BURROWS "BOLTED" FROM 
REPUBLICAN MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON 
PRIVILEGES AND ELECTIONS. 



The Corbett case from Oregon is too well known to need special 
mention. The legislature of Oregon failed to organize two years 
ago, and as a result there has been a vacancy, until the recent 
election of Mr. Simon, a sound-money Republican from that State. 
Henry W. Corbett, formerly Senator from Oregon, chiimed to be 
elected Senator to succeed John H. Mitchell, whose term expired on 
March 4, 1897, and received the Governor's certificate. On Jauuary 
26 last. Senator Caffery (Democrat), from Louisiana, made a report 
from the Committee on Privileges and Elections, concluding with 
the following resolution, viz : 

^^ Resolved, That Hon. Henry W. Corbett is not entitled to take 
his seat in this body as a Senator from the State of Oregon." 

That report was signed by Senator Caffery, of Louisiana (Demo- 
crat) ; by the Populist Senator from Nebraska, William V. Allen ; by 
Mr. Blodgett's Senator, Julius Coesar Burrows, from Grand Rapids, 
with whom concurred Senator Pettus (Democrat), from Alabama, 
who put his vote on different grounds from that of Democratic Sen- 
ator Caffery, Populist Senator Allen, and Mr. Blodgett's Senator. 
Senator Turley (Democrat), from Tennessee, is supposed to have con- 
curred with the above Senators named, though he did not sign the 
report, it being stated by Mr. Caffery that it was a majority report. 
The views of the minority were presented by Senator Hoar, of Massa- 
chusetts, with whom concurred Senators Chandler, of New Hampshire, 
Chairman of the Committee Pritchard, of North Carolina, and Sena- 
tor Spooner, of Wisconsin, all able and distinguished lawyers, save 
perhaps Mr. Pritchard, who is an able and well equipped Senator, 
with a previous experience as an editor, and all Republicans. There 
had been rumors that Mr. Burrows was wavering, but his Repub- 
lican colleagues on the committee did not believe it, and never 
believed it until he announced his purpose to vote against Mr. 
Corbett. Mr. Mitchell had been for many years a Senator ; was an 
ardent silver man (like Mr. Blodgett's Senator until two years ago), 
and Mr. Burrows' conduct was a great surprise to his Republican 
colleagues. Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Burrows had been colleagues on 
the Committee on Claims, and Mr. Mitchell — like Mr. Blodgett's 
Senator — is said to be one of lobbyist " Nat " McKay's " steady 



122 

company." The report was called up in the Senate and debated at 
considerable length. On February 28 Senator Barrows read a long 
speech, consuming between two and three hours, which had been 
prepared by ex-Senator John H. Mitchell, of Oregon, discussing the 
law and gospel of the Corbett case, although in the previous session 
he was for Corbett. Tiie speech occupies between twenty and thirty 
pages of the Congressional Record, and a comparison between it 
and the speech made by Senator Mitchell in 1892 on the Mantle 
case from Montana shows that they are substantially identical, the 
names simply being changed to fit the case. Less than half a dozen 
Senators listened to ex-Senator Mitchell's speech read by Senator 
Burrows, although it was an able speech, taking, however, the 
Democratic side of the case. The few Senators who did pretend to 
listen were reinforced by other Senators and by a half dozen ex- 
Senators, who were more or less interested in the case, among them 
being ex-Senutor Mitchell and ex-Senator Call, of Florida, the last 
counsel for Corbett. The vote was taken at the conclusion of the 
speech of Senator Morgan, of Alabama, and resulted in agreeing to 
the resolution reported by Senator Caffery by yeas 50, na3's 19. 
All the silver Senators and ever}' Democratic Senator present not 
paired voted with Mr. Burrows to deny to Mr. Corbett the seat to 
which he had been elected according to the report of Senators Hoar, 
Chandler, Spooner, and Pritchard. 



A PARAGRAPH WHICH WILL INTEREST GRAND RAPIDS 
PEOPLE, EDITOR AND COMMISSIONER CONGER, AND 
PRIVATE CITIZEN FRANK WAITE OF STURGIS. 

The special attention of the " Columbian Orator " and " private 
secretary " Rose is called to the fact that Mr. Conger desiretf to re- 
tain my nuinuscript as it was not hnpossihle that at some future time 
he might want to avail himself of the (valuable) infonaation and 
statements contained therein. 

Mr. Conger was 7wt appointed postmaster of Grand Rapids, but 
by the indefatigable efforts of Hon. W^m. Alden Smith and the gra- 
cious condescension of Senator Julius Cfesar Burrows, who "yanked " 
back the name of Mr. Frank Waite, of Sturgis (for talking too loud), 
after having given him " first choice," and obtaiued Senator McMil- 
lan's endorsement, and then substituted the name of Mr. E. D. Con- 
ger as a member of the so-called " Industrial Commission," that 
gentleman reached the Government " pay-roll." Can it be possible 
that this explains why the Grand Rapids Herald " took to the woods" 
just prior to the late election? God forbid! 



The Solicitor of the Treasury has pointed out two acts of Con- 
gress, viz.. Section 1784 R. S. and S(>ction 11 of the civil service act 
of June 1(5, 18.S3, wliich will reach Mr. Henry M. Rose for extorting 
from Capt. Pew, a veteran G. A. R. man, the sum of $35.00 per 



123 

month for over two years, and on behalf of the Commander of the 
G. A. E., Department of the Potomac, I shall on Tuesday next 
present the facts to the U. 8. Attorney for the District of Columbia. 



The railroad fare from Kalamazoo to Washington is $16.75, and 
return trip with sleeper and meals pretty near spoils a $50.00 bill. 
Yet Mr. Burrows is allowed $316.00 as mileage aud for 20 years prob- 
ably he has never paid a cent of railroad or Pullman fare. There 
have been 23 sessions, which, at $316.00 allowance for each, netted 
him the neat sum of $7,268, all clear gain. And yet Mr. Burrows in 
1874 denounced this mileage system on the floor of the House as 
" vicious and corrupt." 

During the long service of Julius Caesar Burrows in both houses 
of Congress he was not aware that claims of the State of Michigan 
against the general government to a large amount — approximating 
$300,000 — have been pending in the Interior, Treasury, and War 
Departments. 

Attempts have been made from time to time to collect these 
claims, and Judge Keightley, after his retirement from office in the 
second term of General Grant as third auditor, was appointed State 
agent and collected a considerable sum due the State from the 
United States. From time to time agents have been appointed, but 
nothing has been accomplished. An effort was made to induce 
Governor Rich to appoint an agent, which he refused to do. Claims 
of this character are due to many States in the Union which have 
agents at Washington to look after them. Michigan has had such 
agents iu the past, and will probably have one in the near future, 
who stands a good show — it may be said with propriety — to secure 
a considerable portion of the amount due the State. Governor 
Pingree has looked into the matter aud examined certain papers 
submitted, and in a carefully prepared statement, compiled by 
officers of the Departments named, and a committee of the agents 
of the several States, it appears that there is now probably due the 
State of Michigan from the United States a sum of money approach- 
ing $300,000. 

Why did not Bepresentative Burrows, during his sixteen years' 
service in the House, and his nearly four years' service in the 
Senate, introduce a bill looking to the procurement of this money 
for the State of Michigan ? Why has he not pressed these claims 
upon the heads of the Departments named ? Certainly he could 
not have made himself more " solid " with his constituents and the 
people of the State generally than to have secured even a part of 
these claims. What is the explanation for his negligence in this 
regard ? Is it because the eagle eye of his boon companion, lobbyist 
" Nat " McKay, had not detected the pendenc}' of these claims sub- 
mitted by other States ? or is it because Mr. McKay could not 
secure them at a fee of fifty per cent. — his usual term — for the entire 



124 

amouut collected ? Let Senator Burrows explaiu his uegligence 
and indifference to the interests of the State at large, or have it 
done for him — if he can — to the Republican Senatorial caucus soon 
to meet at Lansing. What account will he be able to render of his 
" stewardship " in the U. S. Senate since January 19, 1895, in this 
regard ? Of course he will say that he knew that bills were pending 
to accomplish tliis result. But he uever went before a committee 
or head of a department to urge their report and settlement. He 
has duplicated scores of other public bills, but this he omitted. 



As illustrating the desperation of " Nat " McKay to stop my op- 
position to Senator Burrows and withhold any damaging statement 
against him by exposing his record, I will mention the fact that a 
leading writer on the Evening Star of this city told the Washington 
correspondent of a leading Western paper that Mr. McKay had con- 
fidentially told him that he had " just employed a lawyer to bring 
Harry Smith before the grand jury for trying to blackmail my friend, 
Senator Burrows." As " Nat " has fixed the local press against ad- 
verse criticism, I had a right to believe, and do believe, that this 
person was sent to warn me against making any publication against 
Senator Burrows. I wrote the Star reporter to come to my oftice 
and give me fuller information. He called, but beat about the bush 
in a vague way, w^hich induced me to tell him I understood the sit- 
uation perfectly, and supposed he was earning his stipend from 
lobbyist " Nat " McKay, and the incident closed. 



If ex-Senator Thomas Witherell Palmer, owner of the Detroit 
Journal, which, according to Mr. Palmer, in April, 1897, " made 
Julius CaBsar Burrows Senator, and would ' knock him out ' if he did 
not vote for the two-dollar lumber rate," — as stated elsewhere — will 
let his flexible mind wander to the contest when he was made U. S. 
Senator, he will recall the circumstance of a bit of attempted treachery 
on the part of Mr. Burrows, which was checked by Collector Digby 
Bell, of Detroit, and which that gentleman narrated with great force 
and unction at Senator Palmer's palatial residence in this city in the 
winter of 1885. Perhaps Senator Palmer would like to have his 
memory refreshed about the matter, and I shall l)e very glad to ac- 
commodate him. Mr. Palmer then denounced Burrows in the most 
bitter manner, and took frequent occasion to express his contempt 
for the "Columl)ian Orator." 



It is possible that in tiie hurry of getting this material together, 
under peculiarly adverse circumstances, I have omitted to state that 
the claim of Julius C;esar liurrows — oft rep(^ated by his satellites — 
that he procured my appointment as Journal Clerk and Assistant 
Register is simply an infamous lie;, without the slightest justitica- 



126 

tion. T was Journal Clerk of the House of Representatives, and had 
been for four years, when Mr. Burrows " reappeared " in (the Forty- 
sixth) Congress, and although a feeble effort was made to reinstate 
the venerable Mr. Barclay, for thirty years the Journal Clerk of the 
House, it was promptly squelched by Speaker Keifer, who stated that 
he had no thought whatever of disturbing me, but, on the contrary, 
specially desired me to remain and assist him as I had assisted 
Speakers Blaine, Kerr and Randall and Speakers ^^/'O tern. Cox and 
Sayler. I have before me a letter from Gen. Keifer saying that 
"Nobody mentioned to me the subject of your retention, as it was 
thoroughly understood that you were to be retained. Certainly Mr. 
Burrows never mentioned it, for he was very busy looking after his 
own interests." 

When I was removed by the Democratic Clerk at the commence- 
ment of the Fiftieth Congress to make room for a seedy cross-road 
country politician from Indiana, a place was promptly made for me 
in the Senate as special clerk of the Committee on Appropriations 
and Finance by resolution of Senator Allison, who lias been my 
staunch and steadfast friend, as I have been his, for thirty years. 
When the Fiftj'-tirst Congress convened T naturally expected to 
resume my old place, and was astonished to find that a New York 
member had presented the name of a friend of Mr. Thomas C. Piatt, 
of that State, for the position of Journal Clerk. I had the support 
of every other member of the New York delegation, but Speaker 
Reed wanted to oblige Mr. Piatt and desired to appoint this person 
as Journal Clerk, making me his assistant and appointing me as 
clerk to the Committee on Rules, which offer I declined. I had the 
strongest sort of an indorsement, signed by every Republican 
member of the House save three (two absentees), insisting on my 
immediate appointment, and Speaker Reed called in consultation 
Messrs. McKinley and Cannon, of the Committee on Rules, and 
Gov. Dingley, of Maine, all of whom insisted upon my prompt 
appointment, to which Speaker Reed assented, and it was made. 

Senator Julius Caesar Burrows had as little to do with that 
appointment as he had to do with writing the Ten Commandments, 
a majority of which he has broken. 

x4s to my appointment as Assistant Register of the Treasury, I 
can only say that I was asked by Mr. Olds in writing — which letter 
lies before me — if I would accept the position, to which I replied 
in the affirmative. The Republican members of the Michigan dele- 
gation very cordially indorsed me, and Senators McMillan and 
Stockbridge visited the President in my behalf. Mr. Burrows made 
two visits to the White House and feebly urged my appointment, and 
then notified me that he had done all he could and that I must look 
out for mj'self. Having stated in an interview in San Francisco in 
the preceding summer that I did not believe President Harrison 
would be nominated, and that if nominated could not be elected, 
and that I thought Senator Allison should be chosen, my appoint- 
ment was " held up " by President Harrison. I think ex-Senator 
Palmer will recall the facts very well. Upon telling Senator Allison 



126 

the situation, he made an appointment with Senators Sewell, of New 
Jersey, and Feltou, of San Francisco, and visited the White House 
and demanded my immediate appointment, which was sent in the 
next da}'. That is the way I was appointed Assistant Register. 

The truth is, that Mr. Blodgett's Senator never was able, during 
his entire service in tlie House, to render me any but the most trivial 
service. I was constantly hel[)ing him. I got Speaker Randall to 
put him in the Chair, taught him the rules and practice of the 
House, boosted him with the newspaper reporters until I found out 
that he was a fraud, a hypocrite, and a hopeless liar, and then I 
quit. I think I have made this matter sufficiently plain, and will 
leave it. 



The duty was assigned me in 1889 of preparing a new code of 
rules for the Fifty-first Congress. Mr. Burrows came to me and 
asked if it were not possible to provide for the consideration of 
Senate bills which referred claims to the Court of Claims in all 
cases where similar bills had been reported by the House committee, 
saying that he especially desired to pass "Nat" McKay's bill, who 
was a good fellow and his particular friend. I told Mr. Burrows 
that in a magazine article four years before I had suggested this 
very provision, and I presented the matter to Speaker Reed, who 
approved it, and as a result I incorporated a clause in Rule XXIV 
providing that a Senate bill referring claims to the Court of Claims, 
if identical with a House bill on the calendar, might be held on the 
Speaker's table and considered without its reference to a committee 
of the House. It was under that clause that "Nat" McKay's bill 
passed by the Senate was passed by the House, and in the unpre- 
cedented period of one year a judgment in McKay's favor of $115,- 
000 was rendered, one judge not sitting in the case. No appeal 
was taken to the Supreme Court of the United States, through 
political inHuence exerted by McKay, and out of this sum he stated 
to me, and has stated to scores of people, whose names I shall be 
happy to furnish any investigating committee of the Michigan legis- 
lature, that he retained but $44,000, the remainder being expended 
as elsewhere stated. It thus appears that "Nat" McKay received 
for building the Squando (vessel named) the sum of $1-^95,000, the 
contract price; $194,5'2(), extra allowance b}- the Navy Department 
in 1804, and $115,157 additional by the Court of Claiuis judgment 
in 1892, or a total of $704,683, a sum which is $309,683 over the 
contract price. 

It has been stated by one of the leading lawyers in Washington 
that if the case had been appealed to the United States Supreme 
Court, the judgment of the Court of Claims in McKay's favor would 
have been reversed under its decision in the case of Choteau v. 
I"^nited States, in what is known as the steamer Etlah case, which is 
identical with the case of the Scpiando. 

It is not necessary to say anything fuither in regard to Nat Mc- 
Kay's career as a lobbyist. He has been paid over two millions of 



127 

dollars by the Government, directly or indirectly, which he has ex- 
pended Avith princely liberality. No one charges that the gentlemen 
who are his guests are paid for their votes with money, but many 
of them are "assisted" by liberal campaign subscriptions, chief 
among whom is Julius Ciesar Burrows. On December 26, 1894, 
when I called at Mr. McKay's residence in Washington to ask him 
to pa}' me something of the balance due me for clerical services 
rendered him in the past, he plead poverty, saying that the " wolves " 
were after him on all sides and " hounding " him to death ; that he had 
subscribed liberally for Burrows' campaign, and yet Burrows had 
just " pulled his leg " for one thousand dollars more. To at least a 
dozen gentlemen, whose names I will furnish, Mr. McKay has stated 
substantial!}' the same thing. He has named to me and others at 
least twenty-five members whom he had " assisted," and this fact is 
so notorious that Mr. McKay has never even pretended to deny it. He 
has stated, and so has his attorney, Mr. Blair, to me that it was his 
(McKay's) habit to pick out each campaign the men that would be 
useful to him and help them through, putting them under obliga- 
tions wdiich they would not resist. 

If Julius Coesar Burrows has 82, 80, 75, 70 or a sufficient number 
of votes pledged to him absolutely, as "Scalper " Rose and others 
assert, why has he made such tremendous and frantic efforts to get 
"just one more vote"? And then, if he has the necessary votes, 
why has he made such equally tremendous and frantic efforts, 
through Representative Grosvenor and Judge Tliompson, of Ohio, 
the leading and trusted managers of Major McKinley at St. Louis, 
next to Mr. Mark Hanna, and by " Nat " McKay and his lawyer, 
to stop me from further exposing Senator Burrows? Echo answers 
" NIT." He has not got the necessary votes, has never had them 
and will never get them. The members of the Michigan legislature 
are not particularly interested in the schemes of the Blodgetts, Tom 
Palmer, the Pennsylvania R. R., and lobbyist " Nat " McKay, even 
if the latter is a " jolly dog." 



Michigan is one of the great commonwealths of the American 
Republic — the greatest on earth. It should be represented in the 
Senate b}- honest and pure as well as able men on whose name and 
character there is no stain. It has such a man in James McMillan. 
If it has not been shown in these pages that Julius Caesar Burrows 
is not such a man, and the legislature of 1899-1900 is put on inquiry, 
I am not alone in making charges affecting tlie iutegritv, per- 
sonal and political, of Julius C;esar Burrows. If the legislature does 
its full duty it will appoint a joint committee to examine these and 
other charges which Avill be made, and it will ask Secretary Russell 
A. Alger, Arthur Hill, and other persons — myself included — to ap- 
pear before such committee and make answ^er to such questions as 
may be asked. The honor of Michigan is at stake. Let not the 
pledges given to Mr. Burrows in ignorance of these facts and record 



128 

stand in the way of a fnll, fearless, and thorongli investigation of 
these charges. 

Let the truth be known though the heavens fall I 



Michigan is rich in having men who will uplift its standing in the 
Senate, lowered by Burrows, the servile tool of the Blodgetts and 
lobbyist " Nat " McKay. It has in Albert Pack, a citizen of high 
character, ability, and integrity ; in Benton Ilanchett, a peerless law- 
yer who will go to the very front in the Senate ; in John Patton, an able 
lawyer with previous experience in the Senate, where he should have 
been retained ; in Thomas J. O'Brien, another able lawyer of fine 
judicial mind, and eminently fitted for the place; in General B, 
M. Cutcheou, whose life has been spent in the service of the Republi- 
can party, with a distinguished record in the House of Representa- 
tives ; in Colonel E. M. Irish, of Kalamazoo, a tine lawyer and a 
gallant soldier. 

And there are others ! 

But why argue the question in the face of the record of Julius 
Ciiesar Burrows, which I have in part presented ? 

Michigan expects every member of its legislature to stand up like 
a Roman and Spartan on this Senatorial question, so that when it 
adjourns its members will not be ashamed to go home and look their 
constituents in the face. 



